Missiles - Split from Ulti-Max topic

[Kagashi]

Sorry, not sure what RAW is, so Im a bit lost.

Edit: Rules as Written? I guess that makes sense if thats what it means.

[Tor]

Yup you guess right, I didn't know what the acronym meant a few months back either.

Typically time fused grenades are 3-5 seconds, that places the detonation about the time of a action.

Well there is the whole issue of special characters who somehow manage 20 attacks or something... but I guess we could assume that as someone gains attacks, they will opt to buy grenades with shorter wait times...

Although this would still cause problems if many-attacks chars took the longer-wait nades from fewer-attacks chars...

Paired Weapon, Quick Drawing, Dual grenades thrown at the feet of all opponents... He'd be a Crazy. He'd be Captain Jamie "Kaboom" Hynaman. Jamie likes big booms. The worst thing to be in such a game would be a Borg. As Borgs would be losing very expensive feet left and right.

How does one pull the pins on dual-wielded grenades? Teeth?

I think we need to invent WP Lacross stick for counter-grenade parry/catch/throwback tactics.

Tor the rule writien for blast radius does not take into account shaping at all.
Every thing in X radius takes damage, is not every thing in X radius that is not shielded.
So to me you are now creating two false mechanics that are not acutaly part of the game.

Common sense dictates that if you are shielded by something else that the shield prevents you from taking damage.

Or else do you suddenly think explosions damage people protected by force fields?

The question is how much shielding is actually needed to absolutely prevent the damage, and to what degree lesser protections would merely reduce it.

So now you are claiming the lack of damage to every part in the example a simple over sight by Palladium? If the explotion worked the way you claim that would a pretty significant over sight. To me it is more logical to assume that it is not true speicaly when combined with the note under main body.

Yup, the example did not include every feasible issue, examples are often simplified.

Take a look at the wording from Rue
...inflicts full damage to the target it strikes (lands at the feet of)...
So let me ask you this normally would a player say "I shoot a volley of missals at the Mystic knight" Or I shoot a volley of missiles at the mystic night armor"?

What a player would say in a combat scenario varies based on what the character or player know about what is going on.

They may not even know they are battling a Mystic Knight.

They may not even know if their enemy is wearing armor, if it was covered by a cloak or something.

They will probably just say -that guy- as opposed to -his armor- but since the armor SHIELDS the guy, it takes the damage instead of him, even though he is ALSO in the blast radius.

Most players I know say the would shoot the mystic knight is the rule saying the human inside the armor takes the damage as he is the target, or the damage is applied to him armor first? The target you throw a grenade at is not the guys boots but the guy.

I do not understand what you are trying to say in the first part.

In the second, a called shot with a thrown weapon like a grenade can be made at the feet, or it can be thrown at the main body.

I suppose the question to ask is whether it explodes when it hits him in the chest, or whether it bounces off and hits the ground and then explodes a moment later, or whether you just throw it on the ground nearby him.

****AM I one thing made up of several parts, or just several things grouped together?****

Both, it is a matter of perspective. What people are considered to be is different than what armor is though. Armor often comes apart in very distinctive pieces.

What you are saying equates that your chest is one thing your arm is a separate thing your hand is a separate thing.

For armor, sure. I do not know if hit locations for most living beings are canonical or optional though.

Why have MDC by location the only reason is called shot.[/quote]The only reason you accept. AoE is a reason some others see for it.

By giving MDC by locaition allows called shots to be used to take something out such as sensors or wings to cause a result that is favorable to the attacker. Thus creating a better affect that does at the cost of not counting toward disabling the whole. *Note there are formulas to determine how much MDC?SDC parts of a creature have when it is not broken down.*

Those would certainly be interesting formulas to apply to living beings, I am just not sure if they are canon or necessitated in the way that hit locations for armor or bots is.

My view is that the "main body" is really an aggregate of the average damage taking of the structure in question in many ways

For things without hit locations, it is. For things that have them, it is not, it represents the torso, the connective center of mass.

when the borg in the previous examples has a grenade or missile detonate at his feet the "main body" damage done IS reflecting that his feet and legs are damaged along with his torso.

No, it does not reflect that at all.

If an explosion damaged the feet, this would make the feet easier to destroy by a subsequent called shot.

By only applying damage to the main body, this would treat a grenade-tween-the-feet scenario as not having damaged the feet in any way and the borg would be just as hard to de-foot as one who had not taken any damage at all.

to go with that assumption technically you should consider multiple locations depleted as a rough approximation of the % of main body damage done.

That would work just fine if we were only dealing with explosions, but with non-AoE attacks, a borg getting slashed in the chest by a sword is still going to have undamaged feet.

One option I could see working as a house rule, is to look at the optional random hit locations, look at how much percentage they represent, and spread explosion damage out based on those percentages when an adequately large AoE attack hits the main body.

Obviously different rules would have to be used for low-radius explosions, called shot explosions, or obvious situations like standing on an exploding fusion block (where feet ought to take the most damage and head the least)

the problem is that this adds tremendously to the bookkeeping required without a significant increase on the "realism"

to go with a horrible example how many people actually play FATAL vs palladium games vs steve jacksons GURPS game system.
FATAL is incredibly detailed it goes into such things as sexual organ size. for probably 99.9% of peoples games it just DOES NOT MATTER.

Organ size does not complicate combat, it is a stat you can calculate and ignore if it does not come up. The complex charGen rules also don`t matter too much if you use the free random charGen software they provide. That system`s lack of success I think may be more due to players fearing character death (like Call of Cthulu) moreso than aversion to mechanics.

There will always be munchkins. Thats why there are Rahu Men with paired weapons, wielding fury blades

That doesn`t seem too munchkin to me. Inevitably Techno-Wizards will have designed a IncreaseWeight or Teleport:Lesser ranged gun to target super-swords like those and take them out of commission during a battle when they become a problem.

why even have to use grenades if you are going to target borg feet? Why not just do it with a JA-12 from 4000 feet away? Does more damage and gets to the point faster. You dont need explosives at all, let alone a splash damage rule, to implement this tactic.

Xactly, snipers gonna snipe. Grenades do have the benefit of being easier to strike with, I guess, if you are worried about missing and getting counter-attacked before you can finish the job... but the low range (and risk to self) that throwing them around has is a big cost...

The real gamechanger would be grenade-launching guns, we should just discuss the balance of those compared to other guns, since throwing them has so many limits.

Technically RAW you can only dodge an attack that is against you.

If you are in the blast radius of an area effect attack, that IS against you. If not a dodge then you can call it a LEAP or a sprint to get some distance from the primary target.

Secondary targets can clearly roll with impact to take a quarter...how do you figure that is done if defenses can`t be called by the non-primary

1) you allow people to dodge attacks that are not leveled against them, we note this.

Dunno where you get the idea you need to be a primary target to avoid AoE attacks not specifically targetted at you.

You now have me wondering whether you allow people to dodge a spray-burst from a machine gun.

simo attack him with the grenade, poof no dodge

I suppose if you have spent an attack to take out the grenade and have not been interrupted.

3) its not a 2 action attack any more than 'I hit the borg' is a called shot

If a weapon is not in your hand you need to spend an action to grab it first. Some guy with nades strapped to his chest still needs to spend 2 actions per nade.

if its a human in non sealed armor then they just died....since they lost all their sdc and hp.....

RUE has rules on surviving MD attacks for SDC beings you can use if death-by-pinky-laser upsets you. I bet CyberKs like it.

[Zer0 Kay]

Guys. Why are you arguing Tor's HOUSE rule? We all know the RAW, and that target is an individual object not a location on the target. Target is not the bull's eye, that's a location. A critical knocks over the target or penetrates it through and through. To strike the bull's eye takes a called shot, to hit the third ring on purpose, called shot. To make a smiley face, many called shots. A critical does not mean you hit the exact spot tour aiming at, it means you hot something vital pr do something otherwise to cause greater damage than normal.

[eliakon]

<snip>

Please explain the game mechanics as to why a person couldnt dodge an attack targeting the ground under them.

Technically RAW you can only dodge an attack that is against you. Now your GM can let you dodge others sure but RAW you have to beat the strike roll of your attacker. You cant dodge the attack of someone elses attack...like that poor rock. Now the borg could roll with impact to reduce the blast...but he cant dodge the attack itself.

If you want to go 100% RAW, you can't actually make most characters, and you can't do anything in combat when your init comes up except to make attacks that include rolling a D20.
So RAW really isn't the way to go.

I would argue that RAW is the way to go if your saying that 'the rules clearly state that this is what is supposed to be' Otherwise, yes I am in agreement there are lots of rule issues... (like blast radius that seems to contradict it self )

That being said, I don't think that you're correct.
A defender can dodge any time a strike roll is made against them.
You're making the assumption that there is only one Defender per attack, and that's never specified that I'm aware of.

There is no strike roll against them. The strike roll is against the rock. The attack hits the rock, and blows up. No strike roll on the person. They do get to roll with blow to take half damage from the explosion though...

We know that a character can Parry an attack made at another person (RGMG 33).

Correct they can make an intercept parry (not an intercept dodge though.... and it costs an action.)

We know that a character can Roll With Impact any time they're struck by an explosion, including if they're only caught in an blast radius.

Again costing an action

I see no reason to believe that it is against the rules to Dodge the blast radius of an attack made against another person, nor any reason to believe that the strike roll strictly applies to only the one target that is chosen to be hit directly by the explosive.

My house rules don't have that problem no. But the RAW has you dodge only strike rolls, not the results of strikes. And the explosion is not a strike, the grenade is a strike, but the explosion is just something you have to roll with, not dodge. (AFAIK)
And if you COULD dodge it, then your burning 2 actions to do so (unless you have autododge, then your burning one)
since you have to spend an action to parry an attack leveled at another person, I see no reason that you do not have to spend an additional action to similarly dodge one.

[Kagashi]

Guys. Why are you arguing Tor's HOUSE rule? We all know the RAW, and that target is an individual object not a location on the target. Target is not the bull's eye, that's a location. A critical knocks over the target or penetrates it through and through. To strike the bull's eye takes a called shot, to hit the third ring on purpose, called shot. To make a smiley face, many called shots. A critical does not mean you hit the exact spot tour aiming at, it means you hot something vital pr do something otherwise to cause greater damage than normal.

No, they are arguing my house rule, choosing to nit pick one aspect, and ignoring the other changes which need to occur for the rule to work.

Regardless, this is exactly why I hate vague rules or half aspects (like having location DC for tech items, but a singular DC value for biological items) and leaving it "up to the GM". Its a cop out. Id rather see black and white rules with little to no interpretation. Because PB RAW are so full of holes and inconsistencies, everybody has a different view on how they should work, creating real conflict in something that is supposed to be a game.

But lets be honest...who where actually plays Palladium for the game mechanics? I'd venture to say the majority are here for the setting(s). I am. I love the setting of Rifts/CE, AtB, and the HU2 setting supplements.

[Zer0 Kay]

<snip>

Please explain the game mechanics as to why a person couldnt dodge an attack targeting the ground under them.

Technically RAW you can only dodge an attack that is against you. Now your GM can let you dodge others sure but RAW you have to beat the strike roll of your attacker. You cant dodge the attack of someone elses attack...like that poor rock. Now the borg could roll with impact to reduce the blast...but he cant dodge the attack itself.

If you want to go 100% RAW, you can't actually make most characters, and you can't do anything in combat when your init comes up except to make attacks that include rolling a D20.
So RAW really isn't the way to go.

I would argue that RAW is the way to go if your saying that 'the rules clearly state that this is what is supposed to be' Otherwise, yes I am in agreement there are lots of rule issues... (like blast radius that seems to contradict it self )

That being said, I don't think that you're correct.
A defender can dodge any time a strike roll is made against them.
You're making the assumption that there is only one Defender per attack, and that's never specified that I'm aware of.

There is no strike roll against them. The strike roll is against the rock. The attack hits the rock, and blows up. No strike roll on the person. They do get to roll with blow to take half damage from the explosion though...

We know that a character can Parry an attack made at another person (RGMG 33).

Correct they can make an intercept parry (not an intercept dodge though.... and it costs an action.)

We know that a character can Roll With Impact any time they're struck by an explosion, including if they're only caught in an blast radius.

Again costing an action

I see no reason to believe that it is against the rules to Dodge the blast radius of an attack made against another person, nor any reason to believe that the strike roll strictly applies to only the one target that is chosen to be hit directly by the explosive.

My house rules don't have that problem no. But the RAW has you dodge only strike rolls, not the results of strikes. And the explosion is not a strike, the grenade is a strike, but the explosion is just something you have to roll with, not dodge. (AFAIK)
And if you COULD dodge it, then your burning 2 actions to do so (unless you have autododge, then your burning one)
since you have to spend an action to parry an attack leveled at another person, I see no reason that you do not have to spend an additional action to similarly dodge one.

cuz your not having to deal with the other person. There is no consideration you are dodging the blast or rather away from where you think it will be. Failure means you went the wrong way.

[Zer0 Kay]

Guys. Why are you arguing Tor's HOUSE rule? We all know the RAW, and that target is an individual object not a location on the target. Target is not the bull's eye, that's a location. A critical knocks over the target or penetrates it through and through. To strike the bull's eye takes a called shot, to hit the third ring on purpose, called shot. To make a smiley face, many called shots. A critical does not mean you hit the exact spot tour aiming at, it means you hot something vital pr do something otherwise to cause greater damage than normal.

No, they are arguing my house rule, choosing to nit pick one aspect, and ignoring the other changes which need to occur for the rule to work.

Regardless, this is exactly why I hate vague rules or half aspects (like having location DC for tech items, but a singular DC value for biological items) and leaving it "up to the GM". Its a cop out. Id rather see black and white rules with little to no interpretation. Because PB RAW are so full of holes and inconsistencies, everybody has a different view on how they should work, creating real conflict in something that is supposed to be a game.

But lets be honest...who where actually plays Palladium for the game mechanics? I'd venture to say the majority are here for the setting(s). I am. I love the setting of Rifts/CE, AtB, and the HU2 setting supplements.

oh I play for the game mechanics <---- liar

[Blue_Lion]

Guys. Why are you arguing Tor's HOUSE rule? We all know the RAW, and that target is an individual object not a location on the target. Target is not the bull's eye, that's a location. A critical knocks over the target or penetrates it through and through. To strike the bull's eye takes a called shot, to hit the third ring on purpose, called shot. To make a smiley face, many called shots. A critical does not mean you hit the exact spot tour aiming at, it means you hot something vital pr do something otherwise to cause greater damage than normal.

No, they are arguing my house rule, choosing to nit pick one aspect, and ignoring the other changes which need to occur for the rule to work.

Regardless, this is exactly why I hate vague rules or half aspects (like having location DC for tech items, but a singular DC value for biological items) and leaving it "up to the GM". Its a cop out. Id rather see black and white rules with little to no interpretation. Because PB RAW are so full of holes and inconsistencies, everybody has a different view on how they should work, creating real conflict in something that is supposed to be a game.

But lets be honest...who where actually plays Palladium for the game mechanics? I'd venture to say the majority are here for the setting(s). I am. I love the setting of Rifts/CE, AtB, and the HU2 setting supplements.

Actually we are arguing that is not rules as written. Tor is trying say that damaging everything is rules as written which it is not.

To Tor the question you could not understand was define target. Most people target an opponent not there armor, boots but the person. But even thou the AOE text says the target takes full damage the damage is dealt to the armor not the human inside.

Pulling pins while dual wilding grenades would be done with the fore finger of the left hand and the pinky of the left. While griping something like a grenade you can still loop a finger threw a pin. A grenade held properly in the left hand is held upside down.

your response of both that I am be both one things or a collection of things is a cop out. For your defense to work you have to say that a part of 1 thing is a separate thing when it is still part of it. (originally body armor did not have hit locations they where added for some reason.)

I am threw with this. No head way is being made and you use cop outs to avoid in convent things. My parting words is the only way to damage anything other than main body is address in combat under the term main body and AOE was not said to damage other than the main body.

[Killer Cyborg]

That being said, I don't think that you're correct.
A defender can dodge any time a strike roll is made against them.
You're making the assumption that there is only one Defender per attack, and that's never specified that I'm aware of.

There is no strike roll against them.

As far as I know, it's never specified that the strike roll is exclusively for the target.
If you Parry an attack against another character, what are you parrying against? The strike roll that's intended for them.
If you Roll with Impact against the explosion that targeted the guy next to you, what number do you have to beat? The strike roll that targeted them.

I know of nothing in RAW that states that a strike roll necessarily only applies to one target, especially in the case of an attack that hits multiple targets.

the RAW has you dodge only strike rolls, not the results of strikes.

Can you provide me the direct quote that states that?

since you have to spend an action to parry an attack leveled at another person, I see no reason that you do not have to spend an additional action to similarly dodge one.

A dodge always takes up an attack unless you have auto-dodge.

[Zer0 Kay]

I agree with Voltron's right leg and KC. What's that mean in the grand scheme of things... Nothing

[Blue_Lion]

Hmmm... Dodging an AOE that does not hit you I can see that being a topic debated.

The easiest way I can think to dodge a AOE is getting out of its blast radius. That would require being able to move greater than the blast radius in one move.

If you can not get out of its blast radius in 1 action then you would have to be getting behind cover. But that is where there might be a issue because the wording of blast radius just says hits every thing in its radius making no allotment for any cover that might be available. So I think it might fall under GM makes a call grey area to determine if it works.

Perhaps this might be worth creating a new topic to debate and see what people can find.

[Tor]

Guys. Why are you arguing Tor's HOUSE rule? We all know the RAW

This is not a house rule. RAW statements support what I am saying. RUEp363 under "Radius Damage" states "everything in the blast radius suffers half damage" and "everything else within the rest of the blast area suffers half the Mega-Damage rolled"

I actually do see the problems with how the rules work, and would probably as a house rule distribute normal strike damage based on the percentile charts of random hit location tables. Distributing AoE damage made with called shots would be harder.

It's funny that a major complaint here is that people don't want their guns and stuff destroyed by explosions when this is clearly what happens.

There IS an out though, if anyone wants to use it.

A note says "may not damage or seriously hurt... tiny items"

So if a GM rules something is tiny enough, it can avoid taking the 1/2 damage. As to how tiny, that isn't specified.

target is an individual object
not a location on the target
Target is not the bull's eye
that's a location

I am not sure why you are introducing this object-target dichotomy. The RD section says EVERYTHING.

A target can be a location (for things that have them) or an overall thing (for things that don't).

A critical does not mean you hit the exact spot tour aiming at, it means you hot something vital pr do something otherwise to cause greater damage than normal.

I am not following the relation of this line of discussion to the topic.

Criticals can happen on called shots, keep in mind, if that matters for anything.

Tor is trying say that damaging everything is rules as written which it is not.

Damaging EVERYTHING is literally what RUE says on page 363 under Radius Damage. You could not be more wrong.

the question you could not understand was define target. Most people target an opponent not there armor, boots but the person.

What most people do does not matter.

Targets by default (when you do not specify a called shot) are the main body of something. Targets can also be called shots on things or parts of someone or what they are wearing.

But even thou the AOE text says the target takes full damage the damage is dealt to the armor not the human inside.

Yes, because sphere-shaping clearly exists. Full-covering armor completely derails the sphere from expanding into harming the body within the armor.

Pulling pins while dual wilding grenades would be done with the fore finger of the left hand and the pinky of the left. While griping something like a grenade you can still loop a finger threw a pin. A grenade held properly in the left hand is held upside down.

That sounds pretty cool. It sounds like it demands a bit more manual dexterity than standard use though, so I'd like to apply some kind of penalty to that.

your response of both that I am be both one things or a collection of things is a cop out.

No, it is simply reality. We are a group of individual atoms. We are also a collective entity composed of atomic parts. This is not an either-or answer. You are introducing a false dichotomy. The 2 classifications are not mutually exclusive, they coexist.

For your defense to work you have to say that a part of 1 thing is a separate thing when it is still part of it.

That is how the world really works BL. There is a carbon atom in me. It is a part of the 1 thing that is me. But it is still a separate thing, I have identified it as a discrete component. An oxygen atom is still a distinct oxygen atom even when it is bonded with 2 Hydrogens.

(originally body armor did not have hit locations they where added for some reason.)

Probably because PA always had them and it allowed people to kill PA pilots faster than people in body armor with head shots.

I am threw with this. No head way is being made and you use cop outs to avoid in convent things.

My relativistic viewpoints are not cop-outs. Your introducting the false dichotomy of part vs. whole is a red herring.

My parting words is the only way to damage anything other than main body is address in combat under the term main body and AOE was not said to damage other than the main body.

AoE explicitly damages everything, we are never told that AoE only damages main bodies.

If you can not get out of its blast radius in 1 action then you would have to be getting behind cover. But that is where there might be a issue because the wording of blast radius just says hits every thing in its radius making no allotment for any cover that might be available. So I think it might fall under GM makes a call grey area to determine if it works.

Yup, is left up to GM whether or not cover is effective. It certainly should be effective in a lot of cases since an MDC wall would have a more consistent surface area than a pair of bionic arms. If even some random head-hunter can block-sacrifice to save himself then even the meagerist MDC wall should be competent at it.

Applying some critical thinking here for a hypothetical GM beyond the Raw, the use of large MDC shields that have a larger surface area than a pair of bionic arms should be equally competent at block-sacrificing to eat a missile, like the blast shield used by the NGR riot police.

[Blue_Lion]

Guys. Why are you arguing Tor's HOUSE rule? We all know the RAW

This is not a house rule. RAW statements support what I am saying. RUEp363 under "Radius Damage" states "everything in the blast radius suffers half damage" and "everything else within the rest of the blast area suffers half the Mega-Damage rolled"

I actually do see the problems with how the rules work, and would probably as a house rule distribute normal strike damage based on the percentile charts of random hit location tables. Distributing AoE damage made with called shots would be harder.

It's funny that a major complaint here is that people don't want their guns and stuff destroyed by explosions when this is clearly what happens.

There IS an out though, if anyone wants to use it.

A note says "may not damage or seriously hurt... tiny items"

So if a GM rules something is tiny enough, it can avoid taking the 1/2 damage. As to how tiny, that isn't specified.

target is an individual object
not a location on the target
Target is not the bull's eye
that's a location

I am not sure why you are introducing this object-target dichotomy. The RD section says EVERYTHING.

A target can be a location (for things that have them) or an overall thing (for things that don't).

A critical does not mean you hit the exact spot tour aiming at, it means you hot something vital pr do something otherwise to cause greater damage than normal.

I am not following the relation of this line of discussion to the topic.

Criticals can happen on called shots, keep in mind, if that matters for anything.

Tor is trying say that damaging everything is rules as written which it is not.

Damaging EVERYTHING is literally what RUE says on page 363 under Radius Damage. You could not be more wrong.

the question you could not understand was define target. Most people target an opponent not there armor, boots but the person.

What most people do does not matter.

Targets by default (when you do not specify a called shot) are the main body of something. Targets can also be called shots on things or parts of someone or what they are wearing.

But even thou the AOE text says the target takes full damage the damage is dealt to the armor not the human inside.

Yes, because sphere-shaping clearly exists. Full-covering armor completely derails the sphere from expanding into harming the body within the armor.

Pulling pins while dual wilding grenades would be done with the fore finger of the left hand and the pinky of the left. While griping something like a grenade you can still loop a finger threw a pin. A grenade held properly in the left hand is held upside down.

That sounds pretty cool. It sounds like it demands a bit more manual dexterity than standard use though, so I'd like to apply some kind of penalty to that.

your response of both that I am be both one things or a collection of things is a cop out.

No, it is simply reality. We are a group of individual atoms. We are also a collective entity composed of atomic parts. This is not an either-or answer. You are introducing a false dichotomy. The 2 classifications are not mutually exclusive, they coexist.

For your defense to work you have to say that a part of 1 thing is a separate thing when it is still part of it.

That is how the world really works BL. There is a carbon atom in me. It is a part of the 1 thing that is me. But it is still a separate thing, I have identified it as a discrete component. An oxygen atom is still a distinct oxygen atom even when it is bonded with 2 Hydrogens.

(originally body armor did not have hit locations they where added for some reason.)

Probably because PA always had them and it allowed people to kill PA pilots faster than people in body armor with head shots.

I am threw with this. No head way is being made and you use cop outs to avoid in convent things.

My relativistic viewpoints are not cop-outs. Your introducting the false dichotomy of part vs. whole is a red herring.

My parting words is the only way to damage anything other than main body is address in combat under the term main body and AOE was not said to damage other than the main body.

AoE explicitly damages everything, we are never told that AoE only damages main bodies.

If you can not get out of its blast radius in 1 action then you would have to be getting behind cover. But that is where there might be a issue because the wording of blast radius just says hits every thing in its radius making no allotment for any cover that might be available. So I think it might fall under GM makes a call grey area to determine if it works.

Yup, is left up to GM whether or not cover is effective. It certainly should be effective in a lot of cases since an MDC wall would have a more consistent surface area than a pair of bionic arms. If even some random head-hunter can block-sacrifice to save himself then even the meagerist MDC wall should be competent at it.

Applying some critical thinking here for a hypothetical GM beyond the Raw, the use of large MDC shields that have a larger surface area than a pair of bionic arms should be equally competent at block-sacrificing to eat a missile, like the blast shield used by the NGR riot police.

Not a red herring, but relevant. If the whole is counted as one thing than main body fulfils the requirement. (combined with the main body part on called shots and natural 20, and the combat example this completely shuts down your side of the debate.) IN order for your point to be valid the parts can not be one thing with the hole, and AoE provides some super easy way around needing to called shots. Never mind that doing so increases combat time, to calculate damage and quickly reduces effective combat ability of people.

It makes no sense to me that because it has MDC per location is provided every part of the whole takes damage but creatures with only main body only take it the main body. Hear is an example of that flawed mind set in combat.

Jimmy Joe Bob redneck is in MDC body armor with X main body and Y at set location. X is more than 2.5Y. Jimmy Joe Bob Redneck gets hit for 2Y damage. By your logic this would destroy part Y of his armor. Jimmy Joe Bob Redneck only has main body SDC, he gets hit by the blast radius explosion for 2 MD from NG plastic explosives. Does part Y of jimmy Joe Bob Redneck body take damage or is it all shielded by his remaining .5Y main body?--AS I understand what you are saying then without his armor he only takes it to the main body.

Your flawed reading has you dealing damage differently based on just being rated with main body. This is not only time consuming but inconsistent with other rules and combat examples. This leads me to believe that for combat damage intents that RAW is treating the whole even with MD by location as 1 thing in AOE and not a group of independent things. But by all means cop out call it a red herring because it defeats your entire stance.

[Killer Cyborg]

Tor, you already know that "everything" isn't meant literally there.

[Zer0 Kay]

Hmmm... Dodging an AOE that does not hit you I can see that being a topic debated.

The easiest way I can think to dodge a AOE is getting out of its blast radius. That would require being able to move greater than the blast radius in one move.

If you can not get out of its blast radius in 1 action then you would have to be getting behind cover. But that is where there might be a issue because the wording of blast radius just says hits every thing in its radius making no allotment for any cover that might be available. So I think it might fall under GM makes a call grey area to determine if it works.

Perhaps this might be worth creating a new topic to debate and see what people can find.

Correct which is what the RAW say. But the getting out of that area can either be a second dodge roll or done with the initial dodge roll but costing two actions. One to dodge the strike and a second action to dodge the AoE. GM's choice.
I'd say (my choice)
small blast radii one dodge roll, two actions
large blast radii two dodge rolls, each taking one action

[Tiree]

Tor, you already know that "everything" isn't meant literally there.

QFT

Because if it were, then a Missile's Blast Radius would only do a Circle of Damage (A Flat Plane), not a Sphere as it is being used!

I'm fairly done with this conversation. Even Kagashi has explained that RAW is to Damage Main Body only, and that damaging everything within the Blast Radius is more of a House Rule. One that I disagree with, but understand completely for a more realism sense. But I still disagree, respectfully.

[Kagashi]

Tor, you already know that "everything" isn't meant literally there.

QFT

Because if it were, then a Missile's Blast Radius would only do a Circle of Damage (A Flat Plane), not a Sphere as it is being used!

I'm fairly done with this conversation. Even Kagashi has explained that RAW is to Damage Main Body only, and that damaging everything within the Blast Radius is more of a House Rule. One that I disagree with, but understand completely for a more realism sense. But I still disagree, respectfully.

Concur. At this point, the only thing left to be said is to repeat what was already said, which is moot since all you have to do is scroll up to see what anybody said...

So either people can take the advice to either use RAW or a variant of a house rule. Either way, I dont care what they do

[Killer Cyborg]

Tor, you already know that "everything" isn't meant literally there.

QFT

Because if it were, then a Missile's Blast Radius would only do a Circle of Damage (A Flat Plane), not a Sphere as it is being used!

I was going more for the "Unless you apply damage to every living cell in the target, to every molecule, to every atom, and to every quark, then you aren't actually 'damaging everything in the blast area'" kind of implication.

But yeah, that too.

[Zer0 Kay]

Tor, you already know that "everything" isn't meant literally there.

QFT

Because if it were, then a Missile's Blast Radius would only do a Circle of Damage (A Flat Plane), not a Sphere as it is being used!

I was going more for the "Unless you apply damage to every living cell in the target, to every molecule, to every atom, and to every quark, then you aren't actually 'damaging everything in the blast area'" kind of implication.

But yeah, that too.

wait so every MD missile blast causes a massive nuclear explosion since an atom can't possibly be MD?

[Killer Cyborg]

I was going more for the "Unless you apply damage to every living cell in the target, to every molecule, to every atom, and to every quark, then you aren't actually 'damaging everything in the blast area'" kind of implication.

But yeah, that too.

wait so every MD missile blast causes a massive nuclear explosion since an atom can't possibly be MD?

Pretty much.

Of course, any nuclear explosions would also do damage to EVERYTHING in the blast radius, so... Better off never using any explosives.
Ever.

(Or maybe just understand that the word "everything" in that passage wasn't meant literally...)

[Blue_Lion]

that would make earth pocked mark with perfectly spherical craters.

[Zer0 Kay]

that would make earth pocked mark with perfectly spherical craters.

How? Each blast that goes off would create another blast so either earth goes bye bye because each sphere digs down further or the surface is covered in overlapped flat circles of oblivion.

[Blue_Lion]

that would make earth pocked mark with perfectly spherical craters.

How? Each blast that goes off would create another blast so either earth goes bye bye because each sphere digs down further or the surface is covered in overlapped flat circles of oblivion.

That is assuming you shoot the same place over and over. The guy that got ripped apart in the bottom of the crater is not worth shooting again.

Pocked marked means that it would be covered in such craters some what consistently.

[Killer Cyborg]

that would make earth pocked mark with perfectly spherical craters.

How? Each blast that goes off would create another blast so either earth goes bye bye because each sphere digs down further or the surface is covered in overlapped flat circles of oblivion.

That is assuming you shoot the same place over and over. The guy that got ripped apart in the bottom of the crater is not worth shooting again.

Pocked marked means that it would be covered in such craters some what consistently.

Blue, what we're saying is that each explosion would dans age atoms, which would most likely result in a nuclear explosion, which would damage every atom in the blast radius of the nuclear explosion, which would create more nuclear explosions, and so forth until nothing would be left.

[Blue_Lion]

that would make earth pocked mark with perfectly spherical craters.

How? Each blast that goes off would create another blast so either earth goes bye bye because each sphere digs down further or the surface is covered in overlapped flat circles of oblivion.

That is assuming you shoot the same place over and over. The guy that got ripped apart in the bottom of the crater is not worth shooting again.

Pocked marked means that it would be covered in such craters some what consistently.

Blue, what we're saying is that each explosion would dans age atoms, which would most likely result in a nuclear explosion, which would damage every atom in the blast radius of the nuclear explosion, which would create more nuclear explosions, and so forth until nothing would be left.

That is assuming MD weapons would cause a chain explosion which is adding something that the game does not say they do. The blast could damage the atoms in a way we do not know reducing non MDC atoms to subatomic particles with out destroying all of creation. As we know the world was not destroyed in rifts by the frequent use of MD explosives. (But then kind of mute as every one knows that it is not how they where intended to work.

[Killer Cyborg]

"Could," yeah.
By I'd say that given the sheer number of atoms in even a 20' blast area, the odds are good that at least ONE atom would be split.

My point, though, wasn't that thus would necessarily happen.
I was just catching you up on the premise that Zero and I were operating under.

[Zer0 Kay]

that would make earth pocked mark with perfectly spherical craters.

How? Each blast that goes off would create another blast so either earth goes bye bye because each sphere digs down further or the surface is covered in overlapped flat circles of oblivion.

That is assuming you shoot the same place over and over. The guy that got ripped apart in the bottom of the crater is not worth shooting again.

Pocked marked means that it would be covered in such craters some what consistently.

Blue, what we're saying is that each explosion would dans age atoms, which would most likely result in a nuclear explosion, which would damage every atom in the blast radius of the nuclear explosion, which would create more nuclear explosions, and so forth until nothing would be left.

That is assuming MD weapons would cause a chain explosion which is adding something that the game does not say they do. The blast could damage the atoms in a way we do not know reducing non MDC atoms to subatomic particles with out destroying all of creation. As we know the world was not destroyed in rifts by the frequent use of MD explosives. (But then kind of mute as every one knows that it is not how they where intended to work.

okay mister your takin' that far to serious.

[Zer0 Kay]

"Could," yeah.
By I'd say that given the sheer number of atoms in even a 20' blast area, the odds are good that at least ONE atom would be split.

My point, though, wasn't that thus would necessarily happen.
I was just catching you up on the premise that Zero and I were operating under.

The premise of utter and total rediculos sarcasm?

[Tor]

If the whole is counted as one thing than main body fulfils the requirement. (combined with the main body part on called shots and natural 20, and the combat example this completely shuts down your side of the debate.)

If something has hit locations then it is not considered a whole. In many cases hit locations describe very discrete things, like the damage capacity of a giant sword or separate gun held by a robot. Everything should get hit unless explicitly required otherwise.

At most you might have some flexibility for asterisked locations that require called shots. The new bots introduced in Coalition War Campaign in particular, their head description for example, suggests coverage from bulky shoulder plates, which might be red as a coverage-based override of Radius Damage.

IN order for your point to be valid the parts can not be one thing with the hole

No, parts are still things, and everything gets hit. Being part of a greater whole doesn't mean you cease to be something distinctive. For example: If 2 humans get hit by a missile, they don't take damage to the main body of humanity for being part of a collective species.

AoE provides some super easy way around needing to called shots.

What is this, some kind of argument from consequence?

Never mind that doing so increases combat time, to calculate damage and quickly reduces effective combat ability of people.

Yes, getting hit by grenades reduces effective combat abilities. That's realism.

I don't think it increases time to calculate damage, keeping in mind that secondary locations have taken half of what the main body has is not hard. You can compare that amount to their capacity to note when things get destroyed.

It might be more complicated if the GM opts to roll on the optional location malfunction tables, of course. But that also makes it cool.

It makes no sense to me that because it has MDC per location is provided every part of the whole takes damage but creatures with only main body only take it the main body. Hear is an example of that flawed mind set in combat.

The problem here is that things without hit locations don't have main bodies. Their damage pools represent everything collectively.

Jimmy Joe Bob redneck is in MDC body armor with X main body and Y at set location.
X is more than 2.5Y. Jimmy Joe Bob Redneck gets hit for 2Y damage.
By your logic this would destroy part Y of his armor. Jimmy Joe Bob Redneck only has main body SDC, he gets hit by the blast radius explosion for 2 MD from NG plastic explosives. Does part Y of jimmy Joe Bob Redneck body take damage or is it all shielded by his remaining .5Y main body?--AS I understand what you are saying then without his armor he only takes it to the main body.

Whether or not Jimmy takes damage depends on whether or not the set location is covering part of him or not.

If it was something like his arm or leg, then yes, getting hit by an AoE attack when he is no longer completely covered will hurt him.

If on the other hand, it was just some search-light or sensor antenna or weapon that got destroyed, then he should still be protected.

These issues apply just as much with called shots. If I called-shot the head off a SAMAS, I can then snipe the SDC head. If I called-shot the rail-gun or jets, he is still protected by his armor, just unable to use the weapon or fly.

To be technical, a SAMAS rail gun is 'part' of the power-armor since it is connected by an ammo feed to the ammo barrel which is mounted on the PA... but it's a distinct thing that gets hammered by a missile. A gun is going to get damaged separately, being attached to the PA would not protect it from radius-damage. It is equally a hit location as something like a wing or a foot.

Tor, you already know that "everything" isn't meant literally there.

If you mean 'everything unless otherwise indicated', then sure. Obviously someone hiding behind a forcefield won't take the damage. The question is whether or not something is covered. Hit locations aren't covered unless there's something in the way, and there isn't.

Within reason we can allow GM calls based on sphere-shaping though. A missile hitting the front of a SAMAS might not wrap around to hit the booster jets in the back. A missile hitting the back of a SAMAS might not wrap around to hit the rail gun or the head. That depends on how much we judge explosions to wrap around certain obstacles, it's a complex issue. Those protection-exceptions can be introduced by GMs, but unless otherwise indicated (force fields being the clearest-cut example) stuff is not protected.

QFT Because if it were, then a Missile's Blast Radius would only do a Circle of Damage (A Flat Plane), not a Sphere as it is being used!

Geometry lesson: the term 'radius' is also used for spheres.

Unless you can point out where the book says 'circle', I think the reasonable conclusion here is that it refers to the radius of a sphere.

Do you really want to argue this?

Kagashi has explained that RAW is to Damage Main Body only
damaging everything within the Blast Radius is more of a House Rule

I have provided text that directly says EVERYTHING in the radius is hit.

No text has been provided supporting the idea that only the main body is damaged.

The closest thing is a statement saying that main body always gets hit.

Always is not the same word as only.

We explicitly know called shots can be made with missiles.

Therefore this means you can hit things besides the main body.

Therefore, the 'always hit the main body' statement would only make sense if we take this to mean that it will always take at least 1/2 damage if a called shot is made on another region.

I was going more for the "Unless you apply damage to every living cell in the target, to every molecule, to every atom, and to every quark, then you aren't actually 'damaging everything in the blast area'" kind of implication.

I think we have concluded that the 'unless shielded' policy applies, via consideration of things like force fields, people inside MDC armor and block-sacrifices.

An otherwise-indicated policy should still be the default. There is proven 'main only' policy, that is imagination.

[Killer Cyborg]

Tor,
Atoms.

[Tor]

Atoms are not assigned separate amounts. The basis of what to give separate pools to is whatever books say to do it for.

This is not always done consistently. Sometimes armor just gives 1 stat. Sometimes 2, the other being the helmet. Some go further and do it for arm/legs.

We see this in bots and borgs too. Sometimes we are just given an amount for the leg, other times we get a separate amount for the foot.

That does mean that foot-specified guys are worse off than just-leg guys when it comes to AoE stuff. Sucks to be them.

This policy also makes foot-specified guys more vulnerable to called shots. It's an unavoidable problem with inconsistent location specificness.

[Zer0 Kay]

Tor,
Atoms.

Humans don't have hit locations? Didn't they in an old book, maybe sb1 say the arms and legs are like 25% of total hp? So that would mean that biologicals do have hit locations Tor Would just have to calculate those for his game. Have fun Tor.

[Killer Cyborg]

Atoms are not assigned separate amounts.

Sounds like you're saying that "everything" doesn't mean EVERYTHING, then, only certain things.

[Blue_Lion]

Every one knows it is not RAW have every hit location, I think he is arguing this just to argue it.(He himself stated that that the combat example undermines his position but when some one brought it up, it was just a mistake or left out on accident. He actualy presented nothing other than poor rules lawyering that supported his point.) This is Rifts it is not about realisms but having fun.
There are table top war games that try for realism but rifts is not one of them.

[Tor]

Atoms are not assigned separate amounts.

Sounds like you're saying that "everything" doesn't mean EVERYTHING, then, only certain things.

Unprotected atoms do take damage, but those are accounted for by the respective amounts that locations are given.

[Killer Cyborg]

Atoms are not assigned separate amounts.

Sounds like you're saying that "everything" doesn't mean EVERYTHING, then, only certain things.

Unprotected atoms do take damage, but those are accounted for by the respective amounts that locations are given.

What's the damage location for air?

[Zer0 Kay]

What? Unprotected atoms? Are you practicing unsafe fixing? Wait... Atoms can wear armor?

[Blue_Lion]

If the whole is counted as one thing than main body fulfils the requirement. (combined with the main body part on called shots and natural 20, and the combat example this completely shuts down your side of the debate.)

If something has hit locations then it is not considered a whole. In many cases hit locations describe very discrete things, like the damage capacity of a giant sword or separate gun held by a robot. Everything should get hit unless explicitly required otherwise.

At most you might have some flexibility for asterisked locations that require called shots. The new bots introduced in Coalition War Campaign in particular, their head description for example, suggests coverage from bulky shoulder plates, which might be red as a coverage-based override of Radius Damage.

IN order for your point to be valid the parts can not be one thing with the hole

No, parts are still things, and everything gets hit. Being part of a greater whole doesn't mean you cease to be something distinctive. For example: If 2 humans get hit by a missile, they don't take damage to the main body of humanity for being part of a collective species.

AoE provides some super easy way around needing to called shots.

What is this, some kind of argument from consequence?

Never mind that doing so increases combat time, to calculate damage and quickly reduces effective combat ability of people.

Yes, getting hit by grenades reduces effective combat abilities. That's realism.

I don't think it increases time to calculate damage, keeping in mind that secondary locations have taken half of what the main body has is not hard. You can compare that amount to their capacity to note when things get destroyed.

It might be more complicated if the GM opts to roll on the optional location malfunction tables, of course. But that also makes it cool.

It makes no sense to me that because it has MDC per location is provided every part of the whole takes damage but creatures with only main body only take it the main body. Hear is an example of that flawed mind set in combat.

The problem here is that things without hit locations don't have main bodies. Their damage pools represent everything collectively.

Jimmy Joe Bob redneck is in MDC body armor with X main body and Y at set location.
X is more than 2.5Y. Jimmy Joe Bob Redneck gets hit for 2Y damage.
By your logic this would destroy part Y of his armor. Jimmy Joe Bob Redneck only has main body SDC, he gets hit by the blast radius explosion for 2 MD from NG plastic explosives. Does part Y of jimmy Joe Bob Redneck body take damage or is it all shielded by his remaining .5Y main body?--AS I understand what you are saying then without his armor he only takes it to the main body.

Whether or not Jimmy takes damage depends on whether or not the set location is covering part of him or not.

If it was something like his arm or leg, then yes, getting hit by an AoE attack when he is no longer completely covered will hurt him.

If on the other hand, it was just some search-light or sensor antenna or weapon that got destroyed, then he should still be protected.

These issues apply just as much with called shots. If I called-shot the head off a SAMAS, I can then snipe the SDC head. If I called-shot the rail-gun or jets, he is still protected by his armor, just unable to use the weapon or fly.

To be technical, a SAMAS rail gun is 'part' of the power-armor since it is connected by an ammo feed to the ammo barrel which is mounted on the PA... but it's a distinct thing that gets hammered by a missile. A gun is going to get damaged separately, being attached to the PA would not protect it from radius-damage. It is equally a hit location as something like a wing or a foot.

Kagashi has explained that RAW is to Damage Main Body only
damaging everything within the Blast Radius is more of a House Rule

I have provided text that directly says EVERYTHING in the radius is hit.

No text has been provided supporting the idea that only the main body is damaged.

The closest thing is a statement saying that main body always gets hit.

Always is not the same word as only.

We explicitly know called shots can be made with missiles.

Therefore this means you can hit things besides the main body.

Therefore, the 'always hit the main body' statement would only make sense if we take this to mean that it will always take at least 1/2 damage if a called shot is made on another region.

So now we have you clamming that if it has hit location it is not one thing, but a collection of things. That means you are saying that when you buy several things grouped together that are considered separate and not part of 1 larger thing. If this was true and the parts where not part of 1 larger thing they would function on there own.

Your a lot of times example is a false defense because more often than the case is the hit location are things like arm, feet, tires. Which are part of the larger thing and not just a collection of things grouped together. You part about asterisks is a indication that you do not thing every thing does take damage. Thus you are now showing your absolute every thing takes damage stance. Your coverage base defense has no real grounding in the rules as written if every thing means every part of every thing as you claim. You are already stepping outside the text in your rules lower attempted to prove some thing we all know is wrong.

You are saying that tracking the MDC of 11 parts of one power armor does not take longer than just tracking damage to one pull for AOEs does not take more time. That is clearly a false statement has a flaw to it.

Humanity as a whole is not 1 thing but a collection of things IE people. You can not point a gun at humanity as a whole but instead can only can point a gun at the people that are grouped together to make the collective group. So this is a false logic defense made so you can tear it down and prove a point.

You are claiming that creatures without hit locations have no main body but only a collective pool. That does not match the meaning of main body, as listed in RUE but is a requirement you created to support you cause. But here is where you logic takes a real sideways twist. IE you claim that on armor with hit locations the arm takes damage, so you are treating it like a separate thing part of a collective while Jimmy Joe Bob Redneck does not take damage from his arm being hit just because he not listed as having a hit location for his arm. The break down in this is you are stating that his SDC/hp pool covers his entire body, this means you are arbitrarily based on a selective requirement you created that does not match your every thing idea changing how you apply damage if his total HP is not vaporized. So you are demonstrating selective application of damage when you say you he only takes damage if he has hit locations.

The logic of your augments are fundamentally flawed and you may be to close to the issue to see the fundamental flaws.

[Blue_Lion]

Thinking about what you are saying the is one big whole in your argument.
*You claim by RAW every thing in the blast radius with a damage pool takes damage.
This is based on the quote.
Every thing else in the blast radius takes half the damage.

Note no where does it say every thing not behind cover. So any arguments you have in that regard do not match the exact text in RUE and are house rule based on a concoction you jumped to.

Here is the flaw to that it deals damage to every thing.

5 Humans each with a total 176 SDC/HP in armor with 10000 MDC get caught in a AOE for 6 MD.
Now then if every separate thing in the blast radius takes half damage as you claim how many survivors are there.

Lets apply damage to every thing in the blast radius with a damage pool.
We have five suits of armor each taking 3 MD leaving each suit with 9997 MDC.
We have five humans with 176 SDC/hp all killed.
***Why because the rule does not say every thing not behind cover but every thing in the blast radius. As the human and armor are two different things then they both would take half damage if it was literally every thing.

So either the if the text literally means every thing then no one survives a MDC blast. The wording of AOE damage does not allow for not applying damage for cover that is a conclusion you are justifying with block sacrifice but not a stated mechanic.

[Zer0 Kay]

Atoms are not assigned separate amounts.

Sounds like you're saying that "everything" doesn't mean EVERYTHING, then, only certain things.

Yup, everything unless he says it doesn't cuz RAW to him is Rules As Written Tor Explained Nullifications or RAWTEN.

[Tor]

What's the damage location for air?

Us not having a damage capacity for everything does not mean those things are not damaged, just that they are considered inconsequential. Some of the gases in air will burn up from some kinds of missiles, but for the most part I imagine it works like grass and just gets blown around. It's already in a gaseous state.

What? Unprotected atoms? Are you practicing unsafe fixing? Wait... Atoms can wear armor?

Protected atoms: the atoms composing a human wearing a suit of environmental armor.

Unprotected atoms: the outer layer of that armor which is getting blasted by a missile.

we have you clamming that if it has hit location it is not one thing, but a collection of things. That means you are saying that when you buy several things grouped together that are considered separate and not part of 1 larger thing. If this was true and the parts where not part of 1 larger thing they would function on there own.

Wrong, something does not have to 'function' much less function on its own to be a distinct thing.

Your a lot of times example is a false defense because more often than the case is the hit location are things like arm, feet, tires.

Yes, they are given distinct pools so I consider them distinct. Unless something says it is protected, it should be damaged in a missile explosion of large enough radius to include it.

Some of the 'requires a called shot to hit' asterisk things could be perceived as Blast Radius exceptions though.

Any locations lacking that should be damaged.

Which are part of the larger thing and not just a collection of things grouped together.

Tires can be distinct things grouped to something larger to make a larger thing.

You part about asterisks is a indication that you do not thing every thing does take damage.

Please don't make leaps about what you guess I think.

I believe that everything takes damage unless there is reason to think otherwise.

Block-sacrifice, force fields, environmental armor, walls, these are all things which give some indication to think that.

The phrasing of some asterisked hit locations have words which could allow to excepting them as well. These are often small bits which could be shielded by larger portions of a robot or vehicle.

you are now showing your absolute every thing takes damage stance.

I'm not sure if 'showing' was the verb you were looking for, since just before this you seem to imply I was contradicting it.

Please refresh yourself on my stance: it is that everything is hit, unless there's reason to think otherwise.

Being something other than the main body is not reason to think otherwise.

Being shielded by something in some way, is.

Your coverage base defense has no real grounding in the rules as written if every thing means every part of every thing as you claim.

The coverage-based defense is grounded in rules like Block-Sacrifice which show there are exceptions to the default policy.

The default policy is that everything is hit.

Exceptions to this policy exist where explicitly indicated, and arguably also where we can infer they exist based on some logical imagining, which GMs are supposed to do, since rules do not cover every possible variable that can exist in a game.

You are already stepping outside the text in your rules lower attempted to prove some thing we all know is wrong.

Lower attempted?

I'm saying the text has some exceptions (like block sacrifice).

You are saying that tracking the MDC of 11 parts of one power armor does not take longer than just tracking damage to one pull for AOEs does not take more time. That is clearly a false statement has a flaw to it.

You are correct, I reread what I wrote and realized I mistyped.

When I wrote "I don't think it increases time" I meant to write "I don't think it increases time THAT MUCH". My mistake.

Although it adds a bit of time, I don't think it's a notable enough increase to complain about.

Humanity as a whole is not 1 thing but a collection of things IE people.

It is both. It is a matter of perspective.

You can not point a gun at humanity as a whole but instead can only can point a gun at the people that are grouped together to make the collective group.

If you have a big enough gun and all humanity is packed tightly enough together, you can most certainly point a gun at humanity. Spread wider, you would need a bigger gun. You'd also need a tricky gun if they were spread across multiple dimensions, but it's still possible.

this is a false logic defense made so you can tear it down and prove a point.

Study harder BL, that's completely off the mark.

You are claiming that creatures without hit locations have no main body but only a collective pool.

That's the baseline of how they are treated, yes. I believe the percentage allocation is considered option.

If I punch a guy and roll a knockout, he takes SDC or HP damage, even though this is logically going to be a hit on the chin, I don't take it off a head-capacity sub-location.

That does not match the meaning of main body, as listed in RUE but is a requirement you created to support you cause.

No idea what you're going no about here BL, I'm simply pointing out that many beings don't deal with hit locations in spite of things not hitting the torso.

CB1 makes it clear that main body usually describes the torso from the shoulders to the pelvis, or something along those lines, but the main damage pool is still used for certain attacks that do not hit that area. The shin-kick in N&SS for example.

you claim that on armor with hit locations the arm takes damage, so you are treating it like a separate thing part of a collective
while Jimmy Joe Bob Redneck does not take damage from his arm being hit just because he not listed as having a hit location for his arm.

Wrong: I am saying that JJBR's HP/SDC pools collectively reflect not just his 'main body' torso, but also his limbs and stuff.

CB1 even mentions that if you jump on a grenade your limb could be blown off.

you are stating that his SDC/hp pool covers his entire body
this means you are arbitrarily based on a selective requirement you created

Wrong: this is not arbitrary. These requirements were created by the game designers, because they are the ones who decided what things got hit locations (and how many) and which things did not. I did not create anything.

you are demonstrating selective application of damage when you say you he only takes damage if he has hit locations.

This is not about selective application, it's about selective allocation.

The leg/foot dilemma is a good example to use for a discussion like this. I'll even whip up some book examples for you from the NGR book.

Page 54's 29-foot X-500 Forager Battlebot has a 'leg' with 200 MDC, and NO amount is given for a foot.
Page 70's 25-foot X-2000 Dyna-Max has a 'leg' with 300 MDC, and ALSO a foot with 200 MDC.

Anyone can see that the Forager has just as distinctive a 'foot' shape as the Dyna-Max, so there isn't really any excuses for the difference here.

This is not my join choice, Kev simply opted to give one robot MDC for his foot and not give any for the other, or else he forgot when designing them at different points, who knows. Point is, the difference exists, and it's not my invention.

This basically makes it impossible to do a called shot on the 'foot' of the Forager, you can only do a called shot on the leg.

This also means that while missiles can knock out the foot of the Dyna-Max (requiring as much MD as it would take to kill the entire leg of the Forager) before the rest of the leg, a missile cannot prematurely knock out the foot of the Forager by inflicting less than 200 MD.

Your concern goes beyond missiles, it has to do with the selective destructability of various things defined to various levels.

you may be to close to the issue to see the fundamental flaws.

LOL how so?

*You claim by RAW every thing in the blast radius with a damage pool takes damage.
This is based on the quote.
Every thing else in the blast radius takes half the damage.

Note no where does it say every thing not behind cover.

So any arguments you have in that regard do not match the exact text in RUE and are house rule based on a concoction you jumped to.

Sometimes Palladium will make absolute statements which are later made not-so-absolute via later statements. This is something you will just have to make your peace with. Some examples:

from the Hand to Hand Combat section on page 35 of Rifts (original) under 'Strike':
"any roll above a four (4) hits the opponent"

This is clearly not absolute, because if someone rolls an equal or higher dodge, it does not literally 'hit' them.

from the glossary on page 36 of Rifts (original) under 'Natural 20':

"A natural 20 beats all other rolls"
.."and"..
"can only be parried or dodge by another natural 20"

This is a contradiction. Obviously a natural 20 can not beat ALL other rolls, because a natural 20 to dodge IS a roll, and it beats a natural 20 to strike.

You must understand that statements which sound absolute are simply default policies which apply until Palladium contradicts them with some other policy.

Here is the flaw to that it deals damage to every thing.
5 Humans each with a total 176 SDC/HP in armor with 10000 MDC
We have five suits of armor each taking 3 MD leaving each suit with 9997 MDC.
We have five humans with 176 SDC/hp all killed.

Please stop putting up straw men to knock down, I think you know full well that 'everything' has exceptions to it.

Exceptions do not negate a default policy.

The wording of AOE damage does not allow for not applying damage for cover that is a conclusion you are justifying with block sacrifice but not a stated mechanic.

Mechanics do not always have to be explicitly spelled out for us, authors expect us to apply some rational thinking when looking at the rules.

For example, I do not know if there is necessarily a statement saying "if surrounded by a forcefield, it will take the damage from a missile explosion instead of the thing it is protecting" or something along those lines. If we are lacking such a statement, it doesn't matter, because we know enough about how force fields and explosions work to reach that conclusion.

The closest thing I can remember related to that would be Dimension Book 3's discussion of how destroyed forcefields 1/10th missile damage for larger ships, but that doesn't relate to force fields used for small things like robots or body armor.

Atoms are not assigned separate amounts.

Sounds like you're saying that "everything" doesn't mean EVERYTHING, then, only certain things.

Yup, everything unless he says it doesn't

Actually it's everything unless the books say it doesn't. I'd like it if you could avoid lying as if I'm coming up with things on my own Zero, I'm basing it on the rules and the content in the books.

RAW to him is Rules As Written Tor Explained I or RAWTEN.

Where does the N come from? Did you mean 'explained it' in there? Acronyms need work bro.

[Zer0 Kay]

What's the damage location for air?

Us not having a damage capacity for everything does not mean those things are not damaged, just that they are considered inconsequential. Some of the gases in air will burn up from some kinds of missiles, but for the most part I imagine it works like grass and just gets blown around. It's already in a gaseous state.

What? Unprotected atoms? Are you practicing unsafe fixing? Wait... Atoms can wear armor?

Protected atoms: the atoms composing a human wearing a suit of environmental armor.

Unprotected atoms: the outer layer of that armor which is getting blasted by a missile.

we have you clamming that if it has hit location it is not one thing, but a collection of things. That means you are saying that when you buy several things grouped together that are considered separate and not part of 1 larger thing. If this was true and the parts where not part of 1 larger thing they would function on there own.

Wrong, something does not have to 'function' much less function on its own to be a distinct thing.

Your a lot of times example is a false defense because more often than the case is the hit location are things like arm, feet, tires.

Yes, they are given distinct pools so I consider them distinct. Unless something says it is protected, it should be damaged in a missile explosion of large enough radius to include it.

Some of the 'requires a called shot to hit' asterisk things could be perceived as Blast Radius exceptions though.

Any locations lacking that should be damaged.

Which are part of the larger thing and not just a collection of things grouped together.

Tires can be distinct things grouped to something larger to make a larger thing.

You part about asterisks is a indication that you do not thing every thing does take damage.

Please don't make leaps about what you guess I think.

I believe that everything takes damage unless there is reason to think otherwise.

Block-sacrifice, force fields, environmental armor, walls, these are all things which give some indication to think that.

The phrasing of some asterisked hit locations have words which could allow to excepting them as well. These are often small bits which could be shielded by larger portions of a robot or vehicle.

you are now showing your absolute every thing takes damage stance.

I'm not sure if 'showing' was the verb you were looking for, since just before this you seem to imply I was contradicting it.

Please refresh yourself on my stance: it is that everything is hit, unless there's reason to think otherwise.

Being something other than the main body is not reason to think otherwise.

Being shielded by something in some way, is.

Your coverage base defense has no real grounding in the rules as written if every thing means every part of every thing as you claim.

The coverage-based defense is grounded in rules like Block-Sacrifice which show there are exceptions to the default policy.

The default policy is that everything is hit.

Exceptions to this policy exist where explicitly indicated, and arguably also where we can infer they exist based on some logical imagining, which GMs are supposed to do, since rules do not cover every possible variable that can exist in a game.

You are already stepping outside the text in your rules lower attempted to prove some thing we all know is wrong.

Lower attempted?

I'm saying the text has some exceptions (like block sacrifice).

You are saying that tracking the MDC of 11 parts of one power armor does not take longer than just tracking damage to one pull for AOEs does not take more time. That is clearly a false statement has a flaw to it.

You are correct, I reread what I wrote and realized I mistyped.

When I wrote "I don't think it increases time" I meant to write "I don't think it increases time THAT MUCH". My mistake.

Although it adds a bit of time, I don't think it's a notable enough increase to complain about.

Humanity as a whole is not 1 thing but a collection of things IE people.

It is both. It is a matter of perspective.

You can not point a gun at humanity as a whole but instead can only can point a gun at the people that are grouped together to make the collective group.

If you have a big enough gun and all humanity is packed tightly enough together, you can most certainly point a gun at humanity. Spread wider, you would need a bigger gun. You'd also need a tricky gun if they were spread across multiple dimensions, but it's still possible.

this is a false logic defense made so you can tear it down and prove a point.

Study harder BL, that's completely off the mark.

You are claiming that creatures without hit locations have no main body but only a collective pool.

That's the baseline of how they are treated, yes. I believe the percentage allocation is considered option.

If I punch a guy and roll a knockout, he takes SDC or HP damage, even though this is logically going to be a hit on the chin, I don't take it off a head-capacity sub-location.

That does not match the meaning of main body, as listed in RUE but is a requirement you created to support you cause.

No idea what you're going no about here BL, I'm simply pointing out that many beings don't deal with hit locations in spite of things not hitting the torso.

CB1 makes it clear that main body usually describes the torso from the shoulders to the pelvis, or something along those lines, but the main damage pool is still used for certain attacks that do not hit that area. The shin-kick in N&SS for example.

you claim that on armor with hit locations the arm takes damage, so you are treating it like a separate thing part of a collective
while Jimmy Joe Bob Redneck does not take damage from his arm being hit just because he not listed as having a hit location for his arm.

Wrong: I am saying that JJBR's HP/SDC pools collectively reflect not just his 'main body' torso, but also his limbs and stuff.

CB1 even mentions that if you jump on a grenade your limb could be blown off.

you are stating that his SDC/hp pool covers his entire body
this means you are arbitrarily based on a selective requirement you created

Wrong: this is not arbitrary. These requirements were created by the game designers, because they are the ones who decided what things got hit locations (and how many) and which things did not. I did not create anything.

you are demonstrating selective application of damage when you say you he only takes damage if he has hit locations.

This is not about selective application, it's about selective allocation.

The leg/foot dilemma is a good example to use for a discussion like this. I'll even whip up some book examples for you from the NGR book.

Page 54's 29-foot X-500 Forager Battlebot has a 'leg' with 200 MDC, and NO amount is given for a foot.
Page 70's 25-foot X-2000 Dyna-Max has a 'leg' with 300 MDC, and ALSO a foot with 200 MDC.

Anyone can see that the Forager has just as distinctive a 'foot' shape as the Dyna-Max, so there isn't really any excuses for the difference here.

This is not my join choice, Kev simply opted to give one robot MDC for his foot and not give any for the other, or else he forgot when designing them at different points, who knows. Point is, the difference exists, and it's not my invention.

This basically makes it impossible to do a called shot on the 'foot' of the Forager, you can only do a called shot on the leg.

This also means that while missiles can knock out the foot of the Dyna-Max (requiring as much MD as it would take to kill the entire leg of the Forager) before the rest of the leg, a missile cannot prematurely knock out the foot of the Forager by inflicting less than 200 MD.

Your concern goes beyond missiles, it has to do with the selective destructability of various things defined to various levels.

you may be to close to the issue to see the fundamental flaws.

LOL how so?

*You claim by RAW every thing in the blast radius with a damage pool takes damage.
This is based on the quote.
Every thing else in the blast radius takes half the damage.

Note no where does it say every thing not behind cover.

So any arguments you have in that regard do not match the exact text in RUE and are house rule based on a concoction you jumped to.

Sometimes Palladium will make absolute statements which are later made not-so-absolute via later statements. This is something you will just have to make your peace with. Some examples:

from the Hand to Hand Combat section on page 35 of Rifts (original) under 'Strike':
"any roll above a four (4) hits the opponent"

This is clearly not absolute, because if someone rolls an equal or higher dodge, it does not literally 'hit' them.

from the glossary on page 36 of Rifts (original) under 'Natural 20':

"A natural 20 beats all other rolls"
.."and"..
"can only be parried or dodge by another natural 20"

This is a contradiction. Obviously a natural 20 can not beat ALL other rolls, because a natural 20 to dodge IS a roll, and it beats a natural 20 to strike.

You must understand that statements which sound absolute are simply default policies which apply until Palladium contradicts them with some other policy.

Here is the flaw to that it deals damage to every thing.
5 Humans each with a total 176 SDC/HP in armor with 10000 MDC
We have five suits of armor each taking 3 MD leaving each suit with 9997 MDC.
We have five humans with 176 SDC/hp all killed.

Please stop putting up straw men to knock down, I think you know full well that 'everything' has exceptions to it.

Exceptions do not negate a default policy.

The wording of AOE damage does not allow for not applying damage for cover that is a conclusion you are justifying with block sacrifice but not a stated mechanic.

Mechanics do not always have to be explicitly spelled out for us, authors expect us to apply some rational thinking when looking at the rules.

For example, I do not know if there is necessarily a statement saying "if surrounded by a forcefield, it will take the damage from a missile explosion instead of the thing it is protecting" or something along those lines. If we are lacking such a statement, it doesn't matter, because we know enough about how force fields and explosions work to reach that conclusion.

The closest thing I can remember related to that would be Dimension Book 3's discussion of how destroyed forcefields 1/10th missile damage for larger ships, but that doesn't relate to force fields used for small things like robots or body armor.

Atoms are not assigned separate amounts.

Sounds like you're saying that "everything" doesn't mean EVERYTHING, then, only certain things.

Yup, everything unless he says it doesn't

Actually it's everything unless the books say it doesn't. I'd like it if you could avoid lying as if I'm coming up with things on my own Zero, I'm basing it on the rules and the content in the books.

RAW to him is Rules As Written Tor Explained I or RAWTEN.

Where does the N come from? Did you mean 'explained it' in there? Acronyms need work bro.

Well then no atom is protected. The armor just goes boom first then the armors atomic explosion goes boom and makes the atoms in the "protected" guy go boom.
Then a big caption that says MICHAEL BAY!!! appears

Issues with phone, corrected now the 'n' is back.

[Tor]

Well then no atom is protected. The armor just goes boom first then the armors atomic explosion goes boom and makes the atoms in the "protected" guy go boom.
Then a big caption that says MICHAEL BAY!!! appears

Oh I see, this is about atom-splitting.

Even if we were to give an SDC amount to atoms, depleting that would not necessarily mean the atom was 'split' since that refers to the nucleus being separated.

Depleted capacity often refers to something just being compromised so it doesn't function as what it was. Like how RUE says that armor blasted to 0 MDC still provides some AR against SDC attacks. It's still there, it's just junk, like Suigintou.

In the case of atoms we could interpret that as losing an electron, or even gaining one.

Before anyone brings up the capacity of nuclei: there's a reason why terms like 'electron shell' get used, it functions like a force field in some ways. So it would be protected much like Naruni stuff or Block-Sacrifice.

[Blue_Lion]

Lets see Tor said-"Please stop putting up straw men to knock down, I think you know full well that 'everything' has exceptions to it.
Exceptions do not negate a default policy."

"Mechanics do not always have to be explicitly spelled out for us, authors expect us to apply some rational thinking when looking at the rules."

The first part was not a straw man but you just restated what the point was. That every thing does have an exception to it. That was the point I was trying to get you to see. The way damage is dealt the rules treat things with multiple pools as one target/thing. That undermines your statement that every part of one thing (not a collection of things like humans as a whole) has to take damage because it says every thing.
So now on the rational thinking part of it.
We have two viewpoints that need to be looked at the simplest level to determine which is most likely.

A. Every part of a object with a damage pool takes damage. Justification the AOE damage clause statement of every thing. Few people feel this statement is accurate.

B. The main body takes damage not all the parts. Justification-every thing does not literally mean every thing. Combat examples not applying to all parts. Implied intent threw text such as missiles always hit the main body, text in main body saying that to hit any where else requires a called shot. -Most people feel this one accurate.

Looking at those two things and using rational thinking B seams to be the correct thought line.

By the way block going from block sacrifice to non protected in AOE is a huge jump in logic with out sufficient support. That is why I say your statement about non-protected is unsupported.

[Killer Cyborg]

What's the damage location for air?

Us not having a damage capacity for everything does not mean those things are not damaged, just that they are considered inconsequential. Some of the gases in air will burn up from some kinds of missiles, but for the most part I imagine it works like grass and just gets blown around. It's already in a gaseous state.

If "everything" gets damaged by explosives, then the atoms in the air get damaged.

[Killer Cyborg]

Well then no atom is protected. The armor just goes boom first then the armors atomic explosion goes boom and makes the atoms in the "protected" guy go boom.
Then a big caption that says MICHAEL BAY!!! appears

Oh I see, this is about atom-splitting.

Even if we were to give an SDC amount to atoms, depleting that would not necessarily mean the atom was 'split' since that refers to the nucleus being separated.

Depleted capacity often refers to something just being compromised so it doesn't function as what it was. Like how RUE says that armor blasted to 0 MDC still provides some AR against SDC attacks. It's still there, it's just junk, like Suigintou.

In the case of atoms we could interpret that as losing an electron, or even gaining one.

Actually, by your logic, the electrons would all take damage too.

Before anyone brings up the capacity of nuclei: there's a reason why terms like 'electron shell' get used, it functions like a force field in some ways. So it would be protected much like Naruni stuff or Block-Sacrifice.

Is protected stuff still in the blast radius?
If so, then it would be part of "everything."

Again, it sounds like you're saying "Everything means everything (except for some things that Tor thinks are exceptions)."

[Killer Cyborg]

Atoms are not assigned separate amounts.

Sounds like you're saying that "everything" doesn't mean EVERYTHING, then, only certain things.

Yup, everything unless he says it doesn't

Actually it's everything unless the books say it doesn't. I'd like it if you could avoid lying as if I'm coming up with things on my own Zero, I'm basing it on the rules and the content in the books..

Like when the books clearly state that you need a Called Shot to hit anything other than the main body...?

[Blue_Lion]

He is contradicting himself now.
Tor has said both-"Actually it's everything unless the books say it doesn't."
and
"Please stop putting up straw men to knock down, I think you know full well that 'everything' has exceptions to it."

His example of humanity as a whole was the straw man not my use of his logic without his filters that where not properly supported. His saying I need to study more was a way of passively calling me stupid because I look at things difrently, and was pointing out his false defense. Using things as part of a collective(calling the collective a whole) to support parts of one thing argument.

His point is not properly supported by surrounding rules ,combat examples or even general interpretation. Add in that he will at one time say every thing is every thing unless the books says it does not and then later says every thing does not mean every thing. He tears things apart and attacks pieces instead of the whole, so he can rip the context out of what he attacks to weaken it. Simply put he has failed to provide any validity to his point.

I also like that when you take what he says and put in your own words you are suddenly lying even thou the meaning of the two statements are close enough for all intensive purposes.(The easiest way to prove you understand a statement is to put it in your own words. So doing so is not a lie.)

[Zer0 Kay]

Well then no atom is protected. The armor just goes boom first then the armors atomic explosion goes boom and makes the atoms in the "protected" guy go boom.
Then a big caption that says MICHAEL BAY!!! appears

Oh I see, this is about atom-splitting.

Even if we were to give an SDC amount to atoms, depleting that would not necessarily mean the atom was 'split' since that refers to the nucleus being separated.

Depleted capacity often refers to something just being compromised so it doesn't function as what it was. Like how RUE says that armor blasted to 0 MDC still provides some AR against SDC attacks. It's still there, it's just junk, like Suigintou.

In the case of atoms we could interpret that as losing an electron, or even gaining one.

Before anyone brings up the capacity of nuclei: there's a reason why terms like 'electron shell' get used, it functions like a force field in some ways. So it would be protected much like Naruni stuff or Block-Sacrifice.

it was the Michael bay part that gave it away wasn't it?

[Zer0 Kay]

He is contradicting himself now.
Tor has said both-"Actually it's everything unless the books say it doesn't."
and
"Please stop putting up straw men to knock down, I think you know full well that 'everything' has exceptions to it."

His example of humanity as a whole was the straw man not my use of his logic without his filters that where not properly supported. His saying I need to study more was a way of passively calling me stupid because I look at things difrently, and was pointing out his false defense. Using things as part of a collective(calling the collective a whole) to support parts of one thing argument.

His point is not properly supported by surrounding rules ,combat examples or even general interpretation. Add in that he will at one time say every thing is every thing unless the books says it does not and then later says every thing does not mean every thing. He tears things apart and attacks pieces instead of the whole, so he can rip the context out of what he attacks to weaken it. Simply put he has failed to provide any validity to his point.

I also like that when you take what he says and put in your own words you are suddenly lying even thou the meaning of the two statements are close enough for all intensive purposes.(The easiest way to prove you understand a statement is to put it in your own words. So doing so is not a lie.)

intents and
Not intensive
Everything else, yup