Mages and Heavy Armor

Ley Line walkers, Juicers, Coalition Troops, Samas, Tolkeen, & The Federation Of Magic. Come together here to discuss all things Rifts®.

Moderators: Immortals, Supreme Beings, Old Ones

User avatar
Killer Cyborg
Priest
Posts: 27954
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2001 2:01 am
Comment: "Your Eloquence with a sledge hammer is a beautiful thing..." -Zer0 Kay
Location: In the ocean, punching oncoming waves
Contact:

Mages and Heavy Armor

Unread post by Killer Cyborg »

Just for fun, I'm going to demonstrate how exactly the mage/armor rules in RUE actually work. A lot of people know what the rules are, but that's not necessarily the same as understanding what the in-game effects of the rules are.
I'm going off of the rules in RUE, on page 188.

The demonstration will be be a test combat between two mages who are identical except for their armor.
The duel will take place on an infinite, featureless plane.

I'm not going to bother to stat out the mages in this case. I'm going to assume that neither mage has any remarkable attributes, and that neither of them have combat bonuses. Their Hit Points+SDC combined are less than 100, so 1 MD past their armor will kill them. Each mage has 135 PPE. Neither mage has any weapons other than their magic. Each mage has 4 attacks per melee.
For this battle, each mage will using the spell Fire Bolt (4d6 MD), and it will be a simple slug-fest where each mage blasts at the other until one of them drops. The two combatants are standing 50' away.
I am using an online dice rolling program for all rolls.
(Feel free to check my math)


Mage #1 will be wearing Medium Ley Line Walker Concealed Body Armor (60 MDC).
Mage #2 will be wearing new-style Heavy Coalition Armor (100 MDC).

They roll for initiative...
Mage1 rolls a 19
Mage2 rolls a 13

First Round of Attacks:
Mage1 attacks first. He casts Fire Bolt. Strike roll is 17, +4 strike bonus means a total strike of 21. Casting this spell drops his total PPE down to 128.
Mage2 takes 13 MD, dropping his total MDC down to 87.

Mage2 returns fire. He has to spend +20% the PPE cost, bringing the total PPE spent to 8.4 PPE. I don't know of any official rules for handling the partial PPE point, but I'll round it up to 9 PPE for this exercise. Now Mage2's PPE is down to 126.
Now Mage2 has to roll on the interference tables on RUE 188. He rolls a 15, which means that the spell's damage/effects are reduced by 1d4x10%. Bad luck! He rolls a 4, so his damage will be reduced by 40%.
Mage2's strike roll is 11.
Mage1 takes the hit. Damage rolled is 15 MD, 15 - 40% = 9, by my calculations. Mage1's armor is dropped to 51 MDC.

Second Round of Attacks:
Mage1 casts Fire Bolt again. His PPE drops down to 121. His roll to strike is 6, +4 to strike bumps this up to a total strike roll of 10.
Mage2 takes the hit. Damage rolled is 15. Mage2's armor is down to 72 MDC.

Mage2 again casts Fire Bolt, dropping his PPE down to 117. He rolls 39 on the Interference Table, which means that the spell's duration is dropped by 1d4x10%. Since Fire Bolt has no duration, there is no effect this time.
Mage2's combined strike roll is 12 (8+4), and he rolls 22 for damage.
Mage1's armor is now at 29 MDC

Third Round of Attacks:
Mage1 casts Fire Bolt again. His PPE drops down to 114. His roll to strike is 14, +4 to strike bumps this up to a total strike roll of 18.
Mage2 takes the hit. Damage rolled is 10. Mage2's armor is down to 62 MDC.

Mage2 again casts Fire Bolt, dropping his PPE down to 108. He rolls 31 on the Interference Table, which means that the spell's duration is again dropped by 1d4x10%. Since Fire Bolt has no duration, there is once again no effect.
Mage2's combined strike roll is 14 (10+4), and he rolls 13 for damage.
Mage1's armor is now at 16 MDC

Fourth Round of Attacks:
Mage1 casts Fire Bolt again. His PPE drops down to 107. His roll to strike is 16, +4 to strike bumps this up to a total strike roll of 20.
Mage2 takes the hit. Damage rolled is 17. Mage2's armor is down to 45 MDC.

Mage2 again casts Fire Bolt, dropping his PPE down to 99. He rolls 14 on the Interference Table, which means that the spell's damage is again dropped by 1d4x10%. He rolls a 2, which means that his damage is dropped by 20%.
Mage2's combined strike roll is 7 (3+4), and he rolls 19 for damage. Reduced by 10%, the new total damage inflicted is 15.2 (rounded down to 15) MD.
Mage1's armor is now at 1 MDC.


New Melee Round!

Mage1 rolls initiative of 13.
Mage2 rolls initiative of 7.

First Round of Attacks:

Mage 1 attacks first. He casts Fire Bolt, dropping his PPE down to 100. He rolls a combined strike roll of 21 (17+4). He rolls damage of 18.
Mage2's armor is now down to 27 MDC.

Mage2 casts Fire Bolt, dropping his PPE down to 90. He rolls 49 on the Interference Table, which means that the spell's range is dropped by 1d4x10%. He rolls a 4, which means that his range is dropped by 40%. His total range is only 60' now, but Mage1 is 50' away, still within range.
Mage2's combined strike roll is 14 (10+4), and he rolls 13 for damage.
Mage1's armor is now destroyed. It's unclear where the cutoff point for the GI-Joe Rule is, so I'm going to just let the 12 points of extra damage all get soaked by the armor. Mage1 is now armorless.

Second Round of Attacks:

Mage1 casts Fire Bolt again. This drops his PPE down to 93. He rolls a combined strike roll of 21 (17+4). Damage is 15.
Mage2's armor is now down to 12 MDC.

Mage2 casts Fire Bolt, dropping his PPE down to 81. He rolls a 5 on the Interference Table, which means that the spell's damage is dropped by 1d4x10%. He rolls a 1, which means that his damage is dropped by 10%.
Mage2's combined strike roll is 6 (2+4), and he rolls 7 for damage, which is reduced down to 6 MD.
Mage1 is now dead.

Combat Over.



Okay, I didn't know for certain how this would play out, but things went pretty much as I expected them to. I've pointed out before that the penalties that mages receive for wearing armor really aren't all that big of a deal, certainly not a big enough deal to always justify wearing the lighter armor.
(Keep in mind that in this case, I went with Medium LLW armor, not the Light armor that mages typically get in their starting equipment, btw)

The issue is that the penalties aren't very significant.

A +20% PPE cost doesn't really matter most of the time: it's a point or two per spell for low-level spells, and mages get enough PPE these days that that amount isn't likely to make a difference in a single combat. The net result here was simply that Mage1 died with 12 more PPE than Mage2 had.

Then there's the Interference Table. There are already quite a few factors that go into combat. There's the strike roll, the dodge roll (potentially, although we didn't use that here), the damage roll, differences in armor, and so forth. In a finely-tuned machine, the differences that the Interference Table could be a big problem, but combat isn't a finely tuned machine. Even as things are, the penalties COULD mean the difference between life and death for the mage casting the spell... but statistically speaking, they really aren't likely to.
Most of the time, especially if your mage understands the potential penalties that can apply to him, there's not that much of a chance of the penalties going really wrong for the mage. With a straight damage spell like Fire Bolt, damage is only going to be affected 20% of the time, which means that 80% of the time if you're not close to max range, you're going to be just fine. And even if damage IS affected, it might well not be affected very much. 10-20% isn't usually going to be a lot of damage, just a few points of MDC. A lot of the time, that level of damage is going to be soaked by the GI-Joe Rule in any case: if somebody only has 10 MDC left in their armor, it doesn't matter if you inflict 10 MD, or 15 MD, because either way they'll be dropped to zero.
In the above battle, it actually worked the other way, though. If Mage2 had inflicted 1 more MDC earlier in the battle, then he would have gotten a kill one attack sooner, and would have been spared thousands of credits worth of damage to his armor.
Of course, the killing attack works the same way: usually the damage isn't even enough for a few points over the battle to really matter. In this case, once the armor was gone, even a 40% drop in damage wouldn't have spared Mage1's life.
Basically, if you're casting a damage-dealing spell at an enemy who is well within range, the chance that the armor will significantly impair your battle is on average only going to be about 50% of 20% of the time, those times that you not only happen to roll a damage penalty, but when you also roll a 3 or 4 to determine the percentage of reduction.
Even then, it's not necessarily a big deal. If you roll low damage to begin with, even 40% isn't a major problem. With Fire Bolt, you might roll a total damage of 4 MD... and 40% reduction will mean that's dropped to maybe 2 MD, meaning that you've only lost 2 MD. If that makes or breaks the battle, something more is wrong than just what armor you're wearing.

The same kind of thing applies to non-damage spells. If you Magic Net somebody who's well within range, then there's only a 40% chance that the duration is going to be affected. But with a duration of 2 melees per level of the caster, I'd say that in most situations that reduced duration isn't going to matter.
Even if you get a 40% reduction, and you're only 1st level, that'll mean that the spell incapacitates the target(s) for 18 seconds, which is basically a full melee round PLUS the first attack of the next round. Unless you're seriously outnumbered, that'll give you plenty of time to do something else to take out the fallen enemy permanently (or to further incapacitate them).


Of course, I've only really done the ONE combat example there, so I don't have any real proof that the results above would be typical.
Also, there are other factors involved, such as combat tactics, terrain, and whatever. I ran a very simplified scenario.
But I think that it certainly adds a little evidence to what I've been saying for a long time now: The casting penalties for wearing heavy armor don't really matter.
They certainly don't outweigh the benefits of wearing some nice armor, especially at low levels.

If I were playing a mage, I'd really be much more concerned with the "reduces speed and mobility by 1/2" rules, because THAT could seriously matter, depending on what your speed is, and how your GM interprets the word "mobility."
Last edited by Killer Cyborg on Mon Feb 23, 2015 12:26 am, edited 1 time in total.
Annual Best Poster of the Year Awards (2012)

"That rifle on the wall of the laborer's cottage or working class flat is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there." -George Orwell

Check out my Author Page on Amazon!
Shark_Force
Palladin
Posts: 7128
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 4:11 pm

Re: Mages and Heavy Armor

Unread post by Shark_Force »

minor correction: the final line in your example has mage 2 dying when i'm pretty sure it should be mage 1 :P

in any event, i would point out that in a more tactical fight with dodging and casting defensive spells, it's reasonably possible that 2 would have run out of PPE before being able to finish off 1.

but then again, in a more tactical fight, it would probably be an initiative competition to see who can get the first magic net to land or something like that, so that's not necessarily an accurate reflection either :P
User avatar
Killer Cyborg
Priest
Posts: 27954
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2001 2:01 am
Comment: "Your Eloquence with a sledge hammer is a beautiful thing..." -Zer0 Kay
Location: In the ocean, punching oncoming waves
Contact:

Re: Mages and Heavy Armor

Unread post by Killer Cyborg »

Shark_Force wrote:minor correction: the final line in your example has mage 2 dying when i'm pretty sure it should be mage 1 :P


Nope!
Surprise suicide For The Win!!

(Okay, I fixed it. Thanks! :ok:)

in any event, i would point out that in a more tactical fight with dodging and casting defensive spells, it's reasonably possible that 2 would have run out of PPE before being able to finish off 1.


Possibly, yes.
If you want to test-play and post such a scenario, that would be pretty cool.

Although one reason why I didn't bother with dodging in the above scenario (other than just laziness) is that there are complications with dodging, in that it's unclear how exactly it is supposed to work in canon.
You can only declare a dodge after the strike roll is made, but I don't recall the rules ever saying whether or not strike rolls are made in the open, or made secretly by the GM.
And that can make a heck of a difference, tactically!

but then again, in a more tactical fight, it would probably be an initiative competition to see who can get the first magic net to land or something like that, so that's not necessarily an accurate reflection either :P


Yup.
Magic Net is a show-stopper in a LOT of cases.
Annual Best Poster of the Year Awards (2012)

"That rifle on the wall of the laborer's cottage or working class flat is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there." -George Orwell

Check out my Author Page on Amazon!
User avatar
flatline
Knight
Posts: 6153
Joined: Sat Nov 12, 2011 7:05 pm
Location: Memphis, TN

Re: Mages and Heavy Armor

Unread post by flatline »

If I chose not to wear armor, it was never because I was worried about any spell casting penalties.

But to be honest, most GMs that I've known ignored the penalties. Even the speed penalty since they figured that anyone could learn to wear heavy armor after a couple of days of practice.

Not that it mattered, because most of us, even the non-mages, switched to Naruni force fields as soon as we could get our hands on them. Once we had force fields, we only used armor if we needed to hide our identities.

--flatline
I don't care about canon answers. I'm interested in good, well-reasoned answers and, perhaps, a short discussion of how that answer is supported or contradicted by canon.

If I don't provide a book and page number, then don't assume that I'm describing canon. I'll tell you if I'm describing canon.
User avatar
Nekira Sudacne
Monk
Posts: 15488
Joined: Sun Oct 19, 2003 7:22 pm
Comment: The Munchkin Fairy
Location: 2nd Degree Black Belt of Post Fu
Contact:

Re: Mages and Heavy Armor

Unread post by Nekira Sudacne »

This is what happens when you don't take Armor of Ithan as a starting spell :D
Sometimes, you're like a beacon of light in the darkness, giving me some hope for humankind. ~ Killer Cyborg

You can have something done good, fast and cheap. If you want it done good and fast, it's not going to be cheap. If you want it done fast and cheap it won't be good. If you want something done good and cheap it won't be done fast. ~ Dark Brandon
User avatar
Tor
Palladin
Posts: 6975
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 2:37 pm
Comment: If you have something to say, back it up with thoughts and reasons. Simply posting to agree or disagree tends to be a waste.
Location: Pyramid

Re: Mages and Heavy Armor

Unread post by Tor »

Since range-reduction is one of the parts of the spell penalties I felt it a bit unfair to low-armored Mage1 that this was at close range. Had they been fighting at 70 feet then the 1st attack in the 2nd melee Mage2 made against Mage1would've fizzled out before hitting him and he would've survived to make a 3rd attack, meaning he might've won since an average firebolt can take out 14 MDC.

As for you Armor of Ithan folks: unless you build that into your armor as a TW enhancement, it won't cover your armor so it's only really worth casting when your armor's about to be destroyed.
"1st edition? 2nd edition? It doesnt matter! Let's just talk" -Forums of the Megaverse
User avatar
flatline
Knight
Posts: 6153
Joined: Sat Nov 12, 2011 7:05 pm
Location: Memphis, TN

Re: Mages and Heavy Armor

Unread post by flatline »

Tor wrote:As for you Armor of Ithan folks: unless you build that into your armor as a TW enhancement, it won't cover your armor so it's only really worth casting when your armor's about to be destroyed.


I don't think that's how most people interpret that spell. Everyone I've ever played with treated Armor of Ithan as MDC protection over whatever armor you were already wearing.

--flatline
I don't care about canon answers. I'm interested in good, well-reasoned answers and, perhaps, a short discussion of how that answer is supported or contradicted by canon.

If I don't provide a book and page number, then don't assume that I'm describing canon. I'll tell you if I'm describing canon.
Lenwen

Re: Mages and Heavy Armor

Unread post by Lenwen »

When we first started playing we used to house rule.. One tech based force field combined in the tech base armor which is further supplemented by magical armor as well..

Now .. We use the same combo but allow for multiple magical force fields as per description per force field..
User avatar
Pepsi Jedi
Palladin
Posts: 6955
Joined: Wed Oct 18, 2006 3:11 am
Comment: 24 was the start... We are Legion.
Location: Northern Gun

Re: Mages and Heavy Armor

Unread post by Pepsi Jedi »

The range reduction factors in a lot more heavily if the mage isn't with in spitting range of his target.

I know in a 'We're both in the same small room just blasting the crap out of each other" Setting it doesn't seem a huge deal, but had the two not been across a (small) bar from one another in distance, Mr Heavy armor would have felt the range reduction more acutely. When your max range is 100 feet. Having that reduced can be a huge deal. Even if we assume the Mage is... 5th lvl You're still only talking about 125 ft.

With magic's already limited range, limiting it more, seemingly at random, does factor in. You just never know when. If your mage is up against a typical CS lvl 1 grunt in armor with his standard issue CP40.... you'll feel the range. I mean the CP40 already has a range of 2000 feet, but few engagements are -fully- fought at absolute maximum range.

Even if you reduce the Grunt to half range with his rifle, That's still 1000, feet.

So if the fight starts there. The(5th lvl) mage has to advance 875 feet to be at -his- max range. While he's advancing that distance, the CS troop is just shooting him right in the face, pew pew pew. If the mage is in heavy armor, he's going to want to get within 70 feet or so to ensure his spells hit every time. That's just more shots the tech guy is getting off as you run (Rules say you can't run and cast spells, and infact you have to take a moment or two after you stop running, to catch your breath to do so, which takes another action or two.)

It's one of the built in limitations of Magic that most people ignore. Unless you're routinely in (shooting, be it magic or tech) fights at melee distance or with in (Literal) Spitting distance, that range reduction could/would be felt. Technological fighters would always strive to use that range. If I can shoot you 10 times before you can even try and hit me, I'm going to do it. Being forced to be right up close and personal is a dangerous limitation. Having to do it in light armor makes it even worse. Guns work at point blank range and all the way out to 2,000 ft. Spells... well the one up there has a starting range of 100 feet, before distance reduction. Having pitifully short range, that can be reduced 40% or more, is a pretty bad limitation. You can throw a grenade 100 feet.

Again, not every fight is going to be at 2,000 ft. Mages are going to want to get in nice and close before opening up. The bad thing is, when you're nice and close... you're nice and close... it's a two way street, or more apt, two way shooting alley.

(And yes. I know there are things like Magic Net and carpet of adhesion. But there's also technological things like... boom guns and missile launchers. Area effect weapons and what not.
Image

Lt. Nyota Uhura: I'm impressed. For a moment there, I thought you were just a dumb hick who only has sex with farm animals.

James Tiberius Kirk: Well, not _only_...
User avatar
Killer Cyborg
Priest
Posts: 27954
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2001 2:01 am
Comment: "Your Eloquence with a sledge hammer is a beautiful thing..." -Zer0 Kay
Location: In the ocean, punching oncoming waves
Contact:

Re: Mages and Heavy Armor

Unread post by Killer Cyborg »

Nekira Sudacne wrote:This is what happens when you don't take Armor of Ithan as a starting spell :D


It would have bought some time, but not much. It's only 10 MDC to start, and because the offensive spell of choice was Fire Bolt, the armor would have netted out as if it was 20 MDC per casting… but each side would have been able to use it, and I think it would have netted out the same.
Annual Best Poster of the Year Awards (2012)

"That rifle on the wall of the laborer's cottage or working class flat is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there." -George Orwell

Check out my Author Page on Amazon!
User avatar
Killer Cyborg
Priest
Posts: 27954
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2001 2:01 am
Comment: "Your Eloquence with a sledge hammer is a beautiful thing..." -Zer0 Kay
Location: In the ocean, punching oncoming waves
Contact:

Re: Mages and Heavy Armor

Unread post by Killer Cyborg »

Tor wrote:Since range-reduction is one of the parts of the spell penalties I felt it a bit unfair to low-armored Mage1 that this was at close range. Had they been fighting at 70 feet then the 1st attack in the 2nd melee Mage2 made against Mage1would've fizzled out before hitting him and he would've survived to make a 3rd attack, meaning he might've won since an average firebolt can take out 14 MDC.


Most combat I've seen takes place either well beyond spell range, or pretty close to the target.
IF the distances had been different, then you'd have seen Mage2 trying to move in closer to compensate for potential range loss.
For that matter, if Mage1 had been thinking about things, he could have tried to increase the distance between them, in order to take advantage of his opponent's potential heavy armor penalties.
As I said, strategy and circumstance can alter the situation.
Annual Best Poster of the Year Awards (2012)

"That rifle on the wall of the laborer's cottage or working class flat is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there." -George Orwell

Check out my Author Page on Amazon!
User avatar
Killer Cyborg
Priest
Posts: 27954
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2001 2:01 am
Comment: "Your Eloquence with a sledge hammer is a beautiful thing..." -Zer0 Kay
Location: In the ocean, punching oncoming waves
Contact:

Re: Mages and Heavy Armor

Unread post by Killer Cyborg »

Pepsi Jedi wrote:The range reduction factors in a lot more heavily if the mage isn't with in spitting range of his target.


Agreed.
But if you want range, get a rifle.
And if you're in heavy armor, try not to start a spell-casting slugfest unless you're in close range.
:p

I know in a 'We're both in the same small room just blasting the crap out of each other" Setting it doesn't seem a huge deal, but had the two not been across a (small) bar from one another in distance, Mr Heavy armor would have felt the range reduction more acutely. When your max range is 100 feet. Having that reduced can be a huge deal. Even if we assume the Mage is... 5th lvl You're still only talking about 125 ft.


I also could have tried to go with a spell with greater range, but I was just doing this quick and dirty.
I fully encourage anybody to run alternate versions of this scenario. I'd like to see things tested thoroughly, if we can.

With magic's already limited range, limiting it more, seemingly at random, does factor in. You just never know when. If your mage is up against a typical CS lvl 1 grunt in armor with his standard issue CP40.... you'll feel the range. I mean the CP40 already has a range of 2000 feet, but few engagements are -fully- fought at absolute maximum range.


See, that's the thing: the mages already feel the range most of the time.
Most spells are a "I'm in the same room" kind of thing, I think.
And a lot of spells are "Touch" spells, in which case range penalties don't matter.

So if the fight starts there. The(5th lvl) mage has to advance 875 feet to be at -his- max range. While he's advancing that distance, the CS troop is just shooting him right in the face, pew pew pew.


That's one reason why this was mage/mage action, instead of Mage/Grunt.
Although if a mage is going to wear heavy armor (or even if he isn't), I'd recommend that he cary a rifle.
Annual Best Poster of the Year Awards (2012)

"That rifle on the wall of the laborer's cottage or working class flat is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there." -George Orwell

Check out my Author Page on Amazon!
User avatar
Tor
Palladin
Posts: 6975
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 2:37 pm
Comment: If you have something to say, back it up with thoughts and reasons. Simply posting to agree or disagree tends to be a waste.
Location: Pyramid

Re: Mages and Heavy Armor

Unread post by Tor »

Low-armor guy should be able to put distance between them faster than high-armor guy can due to weight, right?
"1st edition? 2nd edition? It doesnt matter! Let's just talk" -Forums of the Megaverse
User avatar
kaid
Knight
Posts: 4089
Joined: Mon Dec 15, 2008 12:23 pm

Re: Mages and Heavy Armor

Unread post by kaid »

Nekira Sudacne wrote:This is what happens when you don't take Armor of Ithan as a starting spell :D


Or can't take it as not all spell casters have the option to acquire it. In general the penalties for armor are there and they have some effect but as shown above they are not game stoppers so if you need more durability for some reason they are an option.

Mostly though low level mages would be the ones using them once you get high enough the defensive spells start ramping up fast enough that the amount of armor becomes less and less of an issue. Basically you want enough so you cannot be one shot killed by surprise anything after that is bonus.
User avatar
Killer Cyborg
Priest
Posts: 27954
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2001 2:01 am
Comment: "Your Eloquence with a sledge hammer is a beautiful thing..." -Zer0 Kay
Location: In the ocean, punching oncoming waves
Contact:

Re: Mages and Heavy Armor

Unread post by Killer Cyborg »

Tor wrote:Low-armor guy should be able to put distance between them faster than high-armor guy can due to weight, right?


If they have equal speeds (which they would in this case), then yes.
Annual Best Poster of the Year Awards (2012)

"That rifle on the wall of the laborer's cottage or working class flat is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there." -George Orwell

Check out my Author Page on Amazon!
User avatar
kaid
Knight
Posts: 4089
Joined: Mon Dec 15, 2008 12:23 pm

Re: Mages and Heavy Armor

Unread post by kaid »

One thing to note is over time there has been quite a few of mage friendly natural material armors released from things like hodgepodge armor with 75MDC to various other crafted armors of this nature to things like the lemurian bio skins and bio power armors that if a mage really wants heavy base armor there are a fair amounts to chose from. Its not like you are stuck using plastic man or other low end armors even if you are buying tech stuff.

With the new armored clothing stuff from the NG there are quite a few stylish items to chose from that would not push you into the heavy full EBA penalties.
User avatar
Nekira Sudacne
Monk
Posts: 15488
Joined: Sun Oct 19, 2003 7:22 pm
Comment: The Munchkin Fairy
Location: 2nd Degree Black Belt of Post Fu
Contact:

Re: Mages and Heavy Armor

Unread post by Nekira Sudacne »

Killer Cyborg wrote:
Nekira Sudacne wrote:This is what happens when you don't take Armor of Ithan as a starting spell :D


It would have bought some time, but not much. It's only 10 MDC to start, and because the offensive spell of choice was Fire Bolt, the armor would have netted out as if it was 20 MDC per casting… but each side would have been able to use it, and I think it would have netted out the same.


yes, but you never actually specified the level of the combatants at all. if they were level 5-10, it'd be like a new low-medium suit of armor per casting. I know they were throwing around fire bolts, but nothing says a level 10 LLW has to get more damaging spells if they choose to focus on other things.
Sometimes, you're like a beacon of light in the darkness, giving me some hope for humankind. ~ Killer Cyborg

You can have something done good, fast and cheap. If you want it done good and fast, it's not going to be cheap. If you want it done fast and cheap it won't be good. If you want something done good and cheap it won't be done fast. ~ Dark Brandon
User avatar
Nekira Sudacne
Monk
Posts: 15488
Joined: Sun Oct 19, 2003 7:22 pm
Comment: The Munchkin Fairy
Location: 2nd Degree Black Belt of Post Fu
Contact:

Re: Mages and Heavy Armor

Unread post by Nekira Sudacne »

kaid wrote:
Nekira Sudacne wrote:This is what happens when you don't take Armor of Ithan as a starting spell :D


Or can't take it as not all spell casters have the option to acquire it. In general the penalties for armor are there and they have some effect but as shown above they are not game stoppers so if you need more durability for some reason they are an option.

Mostly though low level mages would be the ones using them once you get high enough the defensive spells start ramping up fast enough that the amount of armor becomes less and less of an issue. Basically you want enough so you cannot be one shot killed by surprise anything after that is bonus.


We were talking about a duel specifically between two ley line walkers, so mages who can't take it don't really come into the given scenario, do they? :D
Sometimes, you're like a beacon of light in the darkness, giving me some hope for humankind. ~ Killer Cyborg

You can have something done good, fast and cheap. If you want it done good and fast, it's not going to be cheap. If you want it done fast and cheap it won't be good. If you want something done good and cheap it won't be done fast. ~ Dark Brandon
User avatar
Killer Cyborg
Priest
Posts: 27954
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2001 2:01 am
Comment: "Your Eloquence with a sledge hammer is a beautiful thing..." -Zer0 Kay
Location: In the ocean, punching oncoming waves
Contact:

Re: Mages and Heavy Armor

Unread post by Killer Cyborg »

Nekira Sudacne wrote:
Killer Cyborg wrote:
Nekira Sudacne wrote:This is what happens when you don't take Armor of Ithan as a starting spell :D


It would have bought some time, but not much. It's only 10 MDC to start, and because the offensive spell of choice was Fire Bolt, the armor would have netted out as if it was 20 MDC per casting… but each side would have been able to use it, and I think it would have netted out the same.


yes, but you never actually specified the level of the combatants at all. if they were level 5-10, it'd be like a new low-medium suit of armor per casting. I know they were throwing around fire bolts, but nothing says a level 10 LLW has to get more damaging spells if they choose to focus on other things.


Fair enough.
At higher levels, yes, AoI would be a lot more useful.
Annual Best Poster of the Year Awards (2012)

"That rifle on the wall of the laborer's cottage or working class flat is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there." -George Orwell

Check out my Author Page on Amazon!
Lenwen

Re: Mages and Heavy Armor

Unread post by Lenwen »

Had a mage who wore a dragon skin armor that had just under 235 mdc in the chest piece tho the chest piece was thee only armored piece he used. He then had multiple force fields for use over everything else. So the mage actually came out ahead of all coalition soldier's armors .. and he used TW weaponry almost exclusively only relying upon actual spells in none combat situations
User avatar
kaid
Knight
Posts: 4089
Joined: Mon Dec 15, 2008 12:23 pm

Re: Mages and Heavy Armor

Unread post by kaid »

Lenwen wrote:Had a mage who wore a dragon skin armor that had just under 235 mdc in the chest piece tho the chest piece was thee only armored piece he used. He then had multiple force fields for use over everything else. So the mage actually came out ahead of all coalition soldier's armors .. and he used TW weaponry almost exclusively only relying upon actual spells in none combat situations



My dream mage twink armor is the barnacle armor from lemuria. Basically light power armor that is self regenerating and has a built in PPE battery you can use to fuel your spells.
User avatar
Mlp7029
Dungeon Crawler
Posts: 348
Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2013 11:11 am

Re: Mages and Heavy Armor

Unread post by Mlp7029 »

Interesting but not real usefull. What Mage goes around casting Firebolt instead of pulling out his Wilks Pulse Rifle? Magic is awesome defensively and for lots of other uses except dealing out damage with low level spells.
User avatar
kaid
Knight
Posts: 4089
Joined: Mon Dec 15, 2008 12:23 pm

Re: Mages and Heavy Armor

Unread post by kaid »

Mlp7029 wrote:Interesting but not real usefull. What Mage goes around casting Firebolt instead of pulling out his Wilks Pulse Rifle? Magic is awesome defensively and for lots of other uses except dealing out damage with low level spells.



This is pretty true. The main guys I have seen in play lean hard on their attack combat magics were one elemental fusionist and a few warlocks. The elemental fusionsist have the advantage of reasonably strong attacks that tend to be stupidly cheap PPE wise so they can use them pretty aggressively without being a one fight wonder. Warlocks for about the same reason they are not as efficient as fusionists but are about twice as efficient as any other caster plus they get their scaling damage spells earlier so they count as 1 action casts and not 2 action casts for things like call lightning. They also at mid levels obtain some of the best jaw dropping squad blowing up abilities in the game.
User avatar
eliakon
Palladin
Posts: 9093
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 9:40 pm
Comment: Palladium Books Canon is set solely by Kevin Siembieda, either in person, or by his approval of published material.
Contact:

Re: Mages and Heavy Armor

Unread post by eliakon »

I play a lot of mages.....And I rarely use spells for my DPS. And if I am, its specialized spells....
My mages tend to instead fort up under a zillion layers of defensive magics, buff the hell out of their side, and then go in for some highly specialized nukes. Its how most (successful) mages in Palladium that I have seen tend to work as well. There are exceptions of course, there are always exceptions....
And its quite common for the mages to wear the same armor as the rest of the group, what ever that is.
The rules are not a bludgeon with which to hammer a character into a game. They are a guide to how a group of friends can get together to weave a collective story that entertains everyone involved. We forget that at our peril.

Edmund Burke wrote:The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."
User avatar
kaid
Knight
Posts: 4089
Joined: Mon Dec 15, 2008 12:23 pm

Re: Mages and Heavy Armor

Unread post by kaid »

Also if a magic user wants to use magic to kill stuff generally TW weapons are the way to go. Made with the correct options a TW weapons PPE efficiency to damage is nearly always going to be more efficient than spell casting for the same or better damage ratios and faster casting especially for higher level powers.

With TW weapons you can precharge it lets the mages utilize PPE during downtimes to increase their combat endurance for when PPE will be more critically used for other things.
User avatar
Killer Cyborg
Priest
Posts: 27954
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2001 2:01 am
Comment: "Your Eloquence with a sledge hammer is a beautiful thing..." -Zer0 Kay
Location: In the ocean, punching oncoming waves
Contact:

Re: Mages and Heavy Armor

Unread post by Killer Cyborg »

Yes. I've always had my mages use rifles and other energy weapons, including TW weapons (especially as the selection improved).
Part of it is because spells didn't usually have the firepower at lower levels, and part of it was simply because my mages tend to save magic for important stuff, not something as mundane as inflicting raw damage.

BUT one heck of a lot of mage players out there seem to disagree, and to think that mages should use all magic, and only magic, all the time, for everything.

Also, if the mages were shooting it out with guns, or even just using TW devices, then the casting penalties for armor would matter even less. ;)
Annual Best Poster of the Year Awards (2012)

"That rifle on the wall of the laborer's cottage or working class flat is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there." -George Orwell

Check out my Author Page on Amazon!
User avatar
flatline
Knight
Posts: 6153
Joined: Sat Nov 12, 2011 7:05 pm
Location: Memphis, TN

Re: Mages and Heavy Armor

Unread post by flatline »

Killer Cyborg wrote:Yes. I've always had my mages use rifles and other energy weapons, including TW weapons (especially as the selection improved).
Part of it is because spells didn't usually have the firepower at lower levels, and part of it was simply because my mages tend to save magic for important stuff, not something as mundane as inflicting raw damage.

BUT one heck of a lot of mage players out there seem to disagree, and to think that mages should use all magic, and only magic, all the time, for everything.

Also, if the mages were shooting it out with guns, or even just using TW devices, then the casting penalties for armor would matter even less. ;)


With few exceptions, PPE is too precious to spend on spells that merely do damage. I never actually kept track, but I would guess that the vast majority of the damage dealt by any of my mages was via pulse weaponry (like the L-20) or TK Machineguns.

--flatline
I don't care about canon answers. I'm interested in good, well-reasoned answers and, perhaps, a short discussion of how that answer is supported or contradicted by canon.

If I don't provide a book and page number, then don't assume that I'm describing canon. I'll tell you if I'm describing canon.
User avatar
Daniel Stoker
Knight
Posts: 4832
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2000 1:01 am
Comment: Non Impediti Ratione Cogitationis
Location: Jewdica

Re: Mages and Heavy Armor

Unread post by Daniel Stoker »

I've found even for my combat mages it was better to rely on items for doing damage with a few ‘hold out’ damage spells and save most of my PPE and spells to actually take enemies out of combat or make myself harder to hit. Magic Net or Carpet of Adhesion is going to do me a lot more then call lightning.


Daniel Stoker
Judaism - More Old School than either Christianity or Islam.
Shark_Force
Palladin
Posts: 7128
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 4:11 pm

Re: Mages and Heavy Armor

Unread post by Shark_Force »

i like the sustained damage spells. like throwing stones, or electric arc. i wouldn't use them exclusively or anything, but i feel they make a good supplement to having an energy weapon (at least, until sub-particle acceleration is available and your e-clip collection is big enough. and even then, it's not a horrible idea to have something to fall back on if the weapons you carry are unavailable for some reason).

but yeah, generally speaking, dealing damage is something that anyone can do without magic (and frequently be better at it). you don't need to spend years of your life studying to learn that.
User avatar
flatline
Knight
Posts: 6153
Joined: Sat Nov 12, 2011 7:05 pm
Location: Memphis, TN

Re: Mages and Heavy Armor

Unread post by flatline »

Shark_Force wrote:i like the sustained damage spells. like throwing stones, or electric arc. i wouldn't use them exclusively or anything, but i feel they make a good supplement to having an energy weapon (at least, until sub-particle acceleration is available and your e-clip collection is big enough. and even then, it's not a horrible idea to have something to fall back on if the weapons you carry are unavailable for some reason).

but yeah, generally speaking, dealing damage is something that anyone can do without magic (and frequently be better at it). you don't need to spend years of your life studying to learn that.


I don't generally like being close enough to the action to even use a weapon, let alone worry about doing damage via spells, but sometimes bad things happen. With that in mind, Throwing Stones is an excellent spell for encouraging the enemy to keep their head down.

--flatline
I don't care about canon answers. I'm interested in good, well-reasoned answers and, perhaps, a short discussion of how that answer is supported or contradicted by canon.

If I don't provide a book and page number, then don't assume that I'm describing canon. I'll tell you if I'm describing canon.
User avatar
Mlp7029
Dungeon Crawler
Posts: 348
Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2013 11:11 am

Re: Mages and Heavy Armor

Unread post by Mlp7029 »

kaid wrote:Also if a magic user wants to use magic to kill stuff generally TW weapons are the way to go. Made with the correct options a TW weapons PPE efficiency to damage is nearly always going to be more efficient than spell casting for the same or better damage ratios and faster casting especially for higher level powers.

With TW weapons you can precharge it lets the mages utilize PPE during downtimes to increase their combat endurance for when PPE will be more critically used for other things.

Very good point if your GM allows the TW rules in RUE which strangely enough tend to bring the cost of Taw items down as you bring down the PPE activation cost.
User avatar
flatline
Knight
Posts: 6153
Joined: Sat Nov 12, 2011 7:05 pm
Location: Memphis, TN

Re: Mages and Heavy Armor

Unread post by flatline »

Mlp7029 wrote:
kaid wrote:Also if a magic user wants to use magic to kill stuff generally TW weapons are the way to go. Made with the correct options a TW weapons PPE efficiency to damage is nearly always going to be more efficient than spell casting for the same or better damage ratios and faster casting especially for higher level powers.

With TW weapons you can precharge it lets the mages utilize PPE during downtimes to increase their combat endurance for when PPE will be more critically used for other things.

Very good point if your GM allows the TW rules in RUE which strangely enough tend to bring the cost of Taw items down as you bring down the PPE activation cost.


The TW rules presented in RUE need tweaking. As written, they're super easy to abuse.

--flatline
I don't care about canon answers. I'm interested in good, well-reasoned answers and, perhaps, a short discussion of how that answer is supported or contradicted by canon.

If I don't provide a book and page number, then don't assume that I'm describing canon. I'll tell you if I'm describing canon.
User avatar
Mlp7029
Dungeon Crawler
Posts: 348
Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2013 11:11 am

Re: Mages and Heavy Armor

Unread post by Mlp7029 »

flatline wrote:
Mlp7029 wrote:
kaid wrote:Also if a magic user wants to use magic to kill stuff generally TW weapons are the way to go. Made with the correct options a TW weapons PPE efficiency to damage is nearly always going to be more efficient than spell casting for the same or better damage ratios and faster casting especially for higher level powers.

With TW weapons you can precharge it lets the mages utilize PPE during downtimes to increase their combat endurance for when PPE will be more critically used for other things.

Very good point if your GM allows the TW rules in RUE which strangely enough tend to bring the cost of Taw items down as you bring down the PPE activation cost.


The TW rules presented in RUE need tweaking. As written, they're super easy to abuse.

--flatline


Agree totally.
User avatar
Killer Cyborg
Priest
Posts: 27954
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2001 2:01 am
Comment: "Your Eloquence with a sledge hammer is a beautiful thing..." -Zer0 Kay
Location: In the ocean, punching oncoming waves
Contact:

Re: Mages and Heavy Armor

Unread post by Killer Cyborg »

Mlp7029 wrote:
flatline wrote:
Mlp7029 wrote:
kaid wrote:Also if a magic user wants to use magic to kill stuff generally TW weapons are the way to go. Made with the correct options a TW weapons PPE efficiency to damage is nearly always going to be more efficient than spell casting for the same or better damage ratios and faster casting especially for higher level powers.

With TW weapons you can precharge it lets the mages utilize PPE during downtimes to increase their combat endurance for when PPE will be more critically used for other things.

Very good point if your GM allows the TW rules in RUE which strangely enough tend to bring the cost of Taw items down as you bring down the PPE activation cost.


The TW rules presented in RUE need tweaking. As written, they're super easy to abuse.

--flatline


Agree totally.


The thing that kind of saves the TW rules is that they specify that GMs have final discretion/say in how a device works, or even if it works.
Annual Best Poster of the Year Awards (2012)

"That rifle on the wall of the laborer's cottage or working class flat is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there." -George Orwell

Check out my Author Page on Amazon!
User avatar
Mack
Supreme Being
Posts: 6295
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2000 2:01 am
Comment: This space for rent.
Location: Searching the Dinosaur Swamp
Contact:

Re: Mages and Heavy Armor

Unread post by Mack »

Mlp7029 wrote:Very good point if your GM allows the TW rules in RUE which strangely enough tend to bring the cost of Taw items down as you bring down the PPE activation cost.


[Begin tangent on Techno-Wizardry]

Not exactly. The cost exists on a curve that initially starts downward, then turns back up again. You'll most often see a pretty good initial return, but it then starts climbing as gems continue to be added. When that happens is determined by exactly which spells are involved (i.e. PPE and gems).

Quick example: Teleport Superior, Device Level 5
- 2.5 carats of Lapis Lazuli (the minimum) yields a Build Cost of 612,500 credits
- 10 carats of Lapis Lazuli yields a Build Cost of 200,000 credits (moving down the curve)
- 17 carats of Lapis Lazuli yields a Build Cost of 173,235 credits (lowest cost, bottom of the curve)
- 30 carats of Lapis Lazuli yields a Build Cost of 200,000 credits (moving up the curve)

However, it is accurate to say the Activation Costs continue to decrease as gems are added. Using the above example:
- 600.0 PPE
- 150.0 PPE
- 88.2 PPE
- 50.0 PPE

Which means you may want to continue past the lowest Build Price in order to get to a lower Activation Cost (assuming you can get the addition gems needed).

[End tangent on Techno-Wizardry]
Some gave all.
Love your neighbor.
Know the facts. Know your opinion. Know the difference.
User avatar
flatline
Knight
Posts: 6153
Joined: Sat Nov 12, 2011 7:05 pm
Location: Memphis, TN

Re: Mages and Heavy Armor

Unread post by flatline »

Mack wrote:
Mlp7029 wrote:Very good point if your GM allows the TW rules in RUE which strangely enough tend to bring the cost of Taw items down as you bring down the PPE activation cost.


[Begin tangent on Techno-Wizardry]

Not exactly. The cost exists on a curve that initially starts downward, then turns back up again. You'll most often see a pretty good initial return, but it then starts climbing as gems continue to be added. When that happens is determined by exactly which spells are involved (i.e. PPE and gems).

Quick example: Teleport Superior, Device Level 5
- 2.5 carats of Lapis Lazuli (the minimum) yields a Build Cost of 612,500 credits
- 10 carats of Lapis Lazuli yields a Build Cost of 200,000 credits (moving down the curve)
- 17 carats of Lapis Lazuli yields a Build Cost of 173,235 credits (lowest cost, bottom of the curve)
- 30 carats of Lapis Lazuli yields a Build Cost of 200,000 credits (moving up the curve)

However, it is accurate to say the Activation Costs continue to decrease as gems are added. Using the above example:
- 600.0 PPE
- 150.0 PPE
- 88.2 PPE
- 50.0 PPE

Which means you may want to continue past the lowest Build Price in order to get to a lower Activation Cost (assuming you can get the addition gems needed).

[End tangent on Techno-Wizardry]


Responding to the bolded text above...gems become easier to find when you leave Rifts Earth. In our world, for example, you can buy a pound of amber (about 2300 carats) for less than $1000.

--flatline
I don't care about canon answers. I'm interested in good, well-reasoned answers and, perhaps, a short discussion of how that answer is supported or contradicted by canon.

If I don't provide a book and page number, then don't assume that I'm describing canon. I'll tell you if I'm describing canon.
User avatar
Mlp7029
Dungeon Crawler
Posts: 348
Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2013 11:11 am

Re: Mages and Heavy Armor

Unread post by Mlp7029 »

Mack wrote:
Mlp7029 wrote:Very good point if your GM allows the TW rules in RUE which strangely enough tend to bring the cost of Taw items down as you bring down the PPE activation cost.


[Begin tangent on Techno-Wizardry]

Not exactly. The cost exists on a curve that initially starts downward, then turns back up again. You'll most often see a pretty good initial return, but it then starts climbing as gems continue to be added. When that happens is determined by exactly which spells are involved (i.e. PPE and gems).

Quick example: Teleport Superior, Device Level 5
- 2.5 carats of Lapis Lazuli (the minimum) yields a Build Cost of 612,500 credits
- 10 carats of Lapis Lazuli yields a Build Cost of 200,000 credits (moving down the curve)
- 17 carats of Lapis Lazuli yields a Build Cost of 173,235 credits (lowest cost, bottom of the curve)
- 30 carats of Lapis Lazuli yields a Build Cost of 200,000 credits (moving up the curve)

However, it is accurate to say the Activation Costs continue to decrease as gems are added. Using the above example:
- 600.0 PPE
- 150.0 PPE
- 88.2 PPE
- 50.0 PPE

Which means you may want to continue past the lowest Build Price in order to get to a lower Activation Cost (assuming you can get the addition gems needed).

[End tangent on Techno-Wizardry]

Thanks good example. What did you use for the cost of labor? If you reduce the Device Level to 1 that would drop all the values by a factor of 5 I believe. Do not have the rules with me. So for approx. 20-30 thousand credits you could have a teleport superior harness that would allow you to teleport 600 miles carrying 1000 lbs for 5 PPE. And best of all could be activated in a single melee action provided your GM agrees.
User avatar
flatline
Knight
Posts: 6153
Joined: Sat Nov 12, 2011 7:05 pm
Location: Memphis, TN

Re: Mages and Heavy Armor

Unread post by flatline »

Mlp7029 wrote:
Mack wrote:
Mlp7029 wrote:Very good point if your GM allows the TW rules in RUE which strangely enough tend to bring the cost of Taw items down as you bring down the PPE activation cost.


[Begin tangent on Techno-Wizardry]

Not exactly. The cost exists on a curve that initially starts downward, then turns back up again. You'll most often see a pretty good initial return, but it then starts climbing as gems continue to be added. When that happens is determined by exactly which spells are involved (i.e. PPE and gems).

Quick example: Teleport Superior, Device Level 5
- 2.5 carats of Lapis Lazuli (the minimum) yields a Build Cost of 612,500 credits
- 10 carats of Lapis Lazuli yields a Build Cost of 200,000 credits (moving down the curve)
- 17 carats of Lapis Lazuli yields a Build Cost of 173,235 credits (lowest cost, bottom of the curve)
- 30 carats of Lapis Lazuli yields a Build Cost of 200,000 credits (moving up the curve)

However, it is accurate to say the Activation Costs continue to decrease as gems are added. Using the above example:
- 600.0 PPE
- 150.0 PPE
- 88.2 PPE
- 50.0 PPE

Which means you may want to continue past the lowest Build Price in order to get to a lower Activation Cost (assuming you can get the addition gems needed).

[End tangent on Techno-Wizardry]

Thanks good example. What did you use for the cost of labor? If you reduce the Device Level to 1 that would drop all the values by a factor of 5 I believe. Do not have the rules with me. So for approx. 20-30 thousand credits you could have a teleport superior harness that would allow you to teleport 600 miles carrying 1000 lbs for 5 PPE. And best of all could be activated in a single melee action provided your GM agrees.


There's a thread with some pretty abusive TW creations using RUE rules. It has things like a TW Mend the Broken vehicle upgrade that instantly repairs something like 400MDC for 1PPE. I'll post a link to it if I can find it.

--flatline
I don't care about canon answers. I'm interested in good, well-reasoned answers and, perhaps, a short discussion of how that answer is supported or contradicted by canon.

If I don't provide a book and page number, then don't assume that I'm describing canon. I'll tell you if I'm describing canon.
User avatar
kaid
Knight
Posts: 4089
Joined: Mon Dec 15, 2008 12:23 pm

Re: Mages and Heavy Armor

Unread post by kaid »

flatline wrote:
Mlp7029 wrote:
Mack wrote:
Mlp7029 wrote:Very good point if your GM allows the TW rules in RUE which strangely enough tend to bring the cost of Taw items down as you bring down the PPE activation cost.


[Begin tangent on Techno-Wizardry]

Not exactly. The cost exists on a curve that initially starts downward, then turns back up again. You'll most often see a pretty good initial return, but it then starts climbing as gems continue to be added. When that happens is determined by exactly which spells are involved (i.e. PPE and gems).

Quick example: Teleport Superior, Device Level 5
- 2.5 carats of Lapis Lazuli (the minimum) yields a Build Cost of 612,500 credits
- 10 carats of Lapis Lazuli yields a Build Cost of 200,000 credits (moving down the curve)
- 17 carats of Lapis Lazuli yields a Build Cost of 173,235 credits (lowest cost, bottom of the curve)
- 30 carats of Lapis Lazuli yields a Build Cost of 200,000 credits (moving up the curve)

However, it is accurate to say the Activation Costs continue to decrease as gems are added. Using the above example:
- 600.0 PPE
- 150.0 PPE
- 88.2 PPE
- 50.0 PPE

Which means you may want to continue past the lowest Build Price in order to get to a lower Activation Cost (assuming you can get the addition gems needed).

[End tangent on Techno-Wizardry]

Thanks good example. What did you use for the cost of labor? If you reduce the Device Level to 1 that would drop all the values by a factor of 5 I believe. Do not have the rules with me. So for approx. 20-30 thousand credits you could have a teleport superior harness that would allow you to teleport 600 miles carrying 1000 lbs for 5 PPE. And best of all could be activated in a single melee action provided your GM agrees.


There's a thread with some pretty abusive TW creations using RUE rules. It has things like a TW Mend the Broken vehicle upgrade that instantly repairs something like 400MDC for 1PPE. I'll post a link to it if I can find it.

--flatline



Heck without even getting abusive about it you can pretty easily make a mend the broken thats 2:1 ratio of MDC to PPE for minimal cost which still is far and away better efficiency than casting the spell directly.
User avatar
Mack
Supreme Being
Posts: 6295
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2000 2:01 am
Comment: This space for rent.
Location: Searching the Dinosaur Swamp
Contact:

Re: Mages and Heavy Armor

Unread post by Mack »

Mlp7029 wrote:
Mack wrote:
Mlp7029 wrote:Very good point if your GM allows the TW rules in RUE which strangely enough tend to bring the cost of Taw items down as you bring down the PPE activation cost.


[Begin tangent on Techno-Wizardry]

Not exactly. The cost exists on a curve that initially starts downward, then turns back up again. You'll most often see a pretty good initial return, but it then starts climbing as gems continue to be added. When that happens is determined by exactly which spells are involved (i.e. PPE and gems).

Quick example: Teleport Superior, Device Level 5
- 2.5 carats of Lapis Lazuli (the minimum) yields a Build Cost of 612,500 credits
- 10 carats of Lapis Lazuli yields a Build Cost of 200,000 credits (moving down the curve)
- 17 carats of Lapis Lazuli yields a Build Cost of 173,235 credits (lowest cost, bottom of the curve)
- 30 carats of Lapis Lazuli yields a Build Cost of 200,000 credits (moving up the curve)

However, it is accurate to say the Activation Costs continue to decrease as gems are added. Using the above example:
- 600.0 PPE
- 150.0 PPE
- 88.2 PPE
- 50.0 PPE

Which means you may want to continue past the lowest Build Price in order to get to a lower Activation Cost (assuming you can get the addition gems needed).

[End tangent on Techno-Wizardry]

Thanks good example. What did you use for the cost of labor?


The Build Price I listed is properly titled "Construction Cost of the Device" (RUE p131). It's essentially defined as materials cost and does not include labor (in fact I'm making a note to change my personal reference to Materials Cost). Since that's the only cost formula in the book, it's what I always cite here on the forums. RUE doesn't list a labor rate, so anything that includes labor is a house-rule and I don't want to confuse canon figures with my personal ones.

My personal formula for TW Labor is: 10 * Device Level * hours. Take that for what it's worth.

Mlp7029 wrote:If you reduce the Device Level to 1 that would drop all the values by a factor of 5 I believe. Do not have the rules with me. So for approx. 20-30 thousand credits you could have a teleport superior harness that would allow you to teleport 600 miles carrying 1000 lbs for 5 PPE. And best of all could be activated in a single melee action provided your GM agrees.


At Device Level 1, here's the results (again, did not include labor):
- 1 carat, 300 PPE Activation, 65,000 Materials Cost
- 3.5 carats, 85.7 PPE Activation, 34,643 Materials Cost (lowest cost)
- 30 carats, 10 PPE Activation, 152,000 Materials Cost
- 60 carats, 5 PPE Activation (your target PPE), 301,000 Materials Cost

My labor formula would add the following to each of the above:
- 6,000 credits (10 * 1 * 6,000 hours)
- 1,714 credits (10 * 1 * 171.4 hours)
- 200 credits (10 * 1 * 20 hours)
- 100 credits (yes, only 100... 10 * 1 * 10 hours)
[Note - I freely admit that my labor formula is too low when it's a high level spell and a low device level. In this case I'd go back and make a manual adjustment.]
Some gave all.
Love your neighbor.
Know the facts. Know your opinion. Know the difference.
Post Reply

Return to “Rifts®”