Starting S.D.C. Question

[Hotrod]

RUE p287 says, "Each O.C.C. should indicate how many S.D.C. points a character gets. In the event that it does not, the character starts out with 2D6+12 S.D.C., plus any O.C.C. or R.C.C. bonuses."

Here's the thing. Even in RUE, many of the O.C.C.'s do not list any S.D.C., including the CS military O.C.C.'s, Merc Soldier, Robot Pilot, Cyber Doc, Elemental Fusionist, Ley Line Walkers... I'm sure the list goes on. Meanwhile, in the O.C.C.'s in which the S.D.C. is presented at the top, it's listed as one of a series of O.C.C. bonuses, not as a "starting S.D.C."

How is this supposed to be done?

[Mack]

I'll go with tack it on for the simple reason that I can't see many situations where it will be a significant difference. At the worst, a character would get an extra 2D6+12 SDC.

As long as you're consistent it shouldn't matter.

[Zamion138]

Could go by the old rmb rules if you dont like the newer ones.

"ermining physical S.D.C. is simple, practitioners of magic and scholars and adventurers roll four 6-sided dice (4D6) for S.D.C., psychic R.C.C.s roll three 6-sided dice (3D6) for S.D.C. Men of Arms roll lD4x 10, in addition to any O.C.C. and/or skill bonuses. Dragons do not get physical S.D.C. "

[Marcethus]

Could go by the old rmb rules if you dont like the newer ones.

"ermining physical S.D.C. is simple, practitioners of magic and scholars and adventurers roll four 6-sided dice (4D6) for S.D.C., psychic R.C.C.s roll three 6-sided dice (3D6) for S.D.C. Men of Arms roll lD4x 10, in addition to any O.C.C. and/or skill bonuses. Dragons do not get physical S.D.C. "

I have considered reverting back to this. But I tend to stick with the 2d6+12 then add on whatever the OCC says as bonus SDC. Though I still feel that the Military OCC get left in the cold especially the Core CS ones.

[VictoryWeaver]

What OCC does not have a "+" (or say add) in front of it's OCC bonuses for SDC?

[Hotrod]

What OCC does not have a "+" (or say add) in front of it's OCC bonuses for SDC?

All of the C.S. military, Merc Soldier, Robot Pilot, Elemental Fusionist, Ley Line Walker, Mystic, Shifter, Techno-Wizard, Burster, and Mind Melter. Also Combat cyborg and Dragon, but that makes sense in those contexts.

Dog Boys are the only one I found in RUE that listed a base S.D.C.

[VictoryWeaver]

You are grouping OOCs that do not gain any SDC and those that do as the same thing. They are not. If an OOC does not state the it has a starting SDC, it uses 2d6+12. This is explicit.

You stated there are those that list their SDC in the OOC bonuses instead of as "starting SDC." I asked which of those do not explicitly indicate that those are bonuses?

I ask because:

Each O.C.C. should indicate how many S.D.C. points a character gets. In the event that it does not, the character starts out with 2D6+12 S.D.C., plus any O.C.C. or R.C.C. bonuses.

[drewkitty ~..~]

The "Starting SDC is the total of the "step 2" SDC, plus all the other SDC bonuses.

The 'step 2' SDC in RUE is found on page 287, and is 2d6+12 for humans. As with what the text says you add in any Class bonuses, and then add in any Skill bonuses. !IF! the char just happens to have superpowers any SDC bonuses from them are added to the SDC, The Total of all of these is the char's "starting SDC".

To list them out for making a rifts char…

"step 2" SDC: 2d6+12 for humans or Racial SDC for non-humans
…..Class bonus
…..Skills bonuses
..+.Other SDC bonuses.
…..Starting SDC

---------------------

What OCC does not have a "+" (or say add) in front of it's OCC bonuses for SDC?

To start off the pre-RUE classes.

[Hotrod]

You are grouping OOCs that do not gain any SDC and those that do as the same thing. They are not. If an OOC does not state the it has a starting SDC, it uses 2d6+12. This is explicit.

You stated there are those that list their SDC in the OOC bonuses instead of as "starting SDC." I asked which of those do not explicitly indicate that those are bonuses?

Thanks for the follow up! To answer your question, every single O.C.C. that mentions S.D.C. lists the figure as a bonus, not as a starting value. Not one of them lists an S.D.C. figure as a starting value.

Let's start with the quote from RUE:

Each O.C.C. should indicate how many S.D.C. points a character gets. In the event that it does not, the character starts out with 2D6+12 S.D.C., plus any O.C.C. or R.C.C. bonuses.

The first sentence establishes a guideline that isn't followed anywhere in the book. No O.C.C. in the book indicates how many S.D.C. points a character gets as a starting O.C.C. Dog Boys are the only class of any type that gets such a treatment, and they are an R.C.C. Some O.C.C.'s get a S.D.C. bonus as part of their "O.C.C. Bonuses," with a "+" before the figure, which indicates a bonus, but these do not have a starting S.D.C. Some O.C.C.'s do not have any S.D.C. bonus or starting S.D.C. In either case, as written, not one O.C.C. in the book gets a "starting S.D.C."

I see two ways to interpret this. The first interpretation is that this guideline for what each O.C.C. should have is meaningless, because it isn't followed in the book. Since no O.C.C. gives a starting value, all characters default to 2D6+12 S.D.C. unless something else in their character creation (race, occupation, mutations, whatever) explicitly gives them a different base (i.e. Dog Boys).

The second interpretation is that this first sentence is the intent, and the S.D.C. bonuses listed in those O.C.C.'s is intended to be their starting S.D.C. The second sentence seems to imply that 2D6+12 should be the exception, not the norm. If that is their intent, then it seems reasonable that the O.C.C. bonuses listed for each O.C.C. are, in fact, the base S.D.C. for that character, to be used in lieu of the 2D6+12. This is supported by the fact that most of the skill-based adventurer O.C.C.'s have S.D.C. bonuses that are a little higher than 2D6+12 for the tougher classes like wilderness scouts, and a little lower for the nerdy classes like Rogue Scientist.

Either interpretation seems valid to me. I was asking because I was building a new Disposable N.P.C. generator for the Bandit O.C.C. and, if I follow the first interpretation, his S.D.C. will be almost double that of a C.S. military-type. In a world of M.D.C., it's not a major power difference, but it was one of those nit-picky details that I like to have settled. In this case, I'm inclined to go with the interpretation that gives the disposable bandit less S.D.C., because he's meant to be a red-shirted ensign, not part of the bridge crew, but if this is against the rules, then I'll make the disposable bandit that much tougher.

In any case, this is one of many little issues that tends to complicate the character creation process, and I appreciate the discussion.

[VictoryWeaver]

The first interpretation is that this guideline for what each O.C.C. should have is meaningless, because it isn't followed in the book. Since no O.C.C. gives a starting value, all characters default to 2D6+12 S.D.C. unless something else in their character creation (race, occupation, mutations, whatever) explicitly gives them a different base (i.e. Dog Boys).

That is what the book explicitly says to do. There is literally no other valid reading of the book.

[Marcethus]

The first interpretation is that this guideline for what each O.C.C. should have is meaningless, because it isn't followed in the book. Since no O.C.C. gives a starting value, all characters default to 2D6+12 S.D.C. unless something else in their character creation (race, occupation, mutations, whatever) explicitly gives them a different base (i.e. Dog Boys).

That is what the book explicitly says to do. There is literally no other valid reading of the book.

Actually I could see it going either way. It is unfortunately very vague because of the statement regarding all OCC's should have a listed Starting SDC, which they don't.

[Hotrod]

One other aspect to this is consistency. A C.S. Grunt should be a bit tougher than, say, a Body Fixer, Rogue Scholar, or a Rogue Scientist. If we follow the "Base is 2D6+12 for everyone," then the nerd classes are, on average, considerably tougher than the infantry. While that can certainly happen, it should probably be more the exception than the norm.

[Killer Cyborg]

I suspect that at one point Palladium intended to have a number of OCCs (like Grunts and such) have their own SDC listed in the class description... but then they got distracted by something shiny.

[guardiandashi]

I suspect that at one point Palladium intended to have a number of OCCs (like Grunts and such) have their own SDC listed in the class description... but then they got distracted by something shiny.

I know I found specific sdc's listed somewhere but I don't remember where

[Killer Cyborg]

I suspect that at one point Palladium intended to have a number of OCCs (like Grunts and such) have their own SDC listed in the class description... but then they got distracted by something shiny.

I know I found specific sdc's listed somewhere but I don't remember where

Well, the Juicer and Crazy probably have them.
But I doubt that the chemically enhanced OCCs are the only ones that are supposed to have above-average SDC (not counting bonuses).

In the RMB, Men At Arms had like 1d4x10 SDC, IIRC, for an average of 25
Nerfing that to 19 SDC, the same as Scholars, seems accidental to me.

[drewkitty ~..~]

I suspect that at one point Palladium intended to have a number of OCCs (like Grunts and such) have their own SDC listed in the class description... but then they got distracted by something shiny.

Most of the Classes in RUE have a SDC bonus as one of their class bonuses.

I don't think they meant to change over to the HU type of char template where each one has it's own base SDC.
-----
The two things I could think of for missing SDC bonuses in RUE would be for "Game Balance"…or (for the CS) make them easier to Take out/KO in bar fights

[VictoryWeaver]

Actually I could see it going either way. It is unfortunately very vague because of the statement regarding all OCC's should have a listed Starting SDC, which they don't.

It's actually not vague at all. Even if the OOCs are missing starting SDC, that has absolutely no bearing on SDC bonuses being bonuses. The OOC SDC bonuses are not, somehow, misprints of what the starting SDC was supposed to be. Which is what the other "valid" assertion is. You could make a case for missing starting SDC, but that's not what was being put forth.

[drewkitty ~..~]

Actually I could see it going either way. It is unfortunately very vague because of the statement regarding all OCC's should have a listed Starting SDC, which they don't.

It's actually not vague at all. Even if the OOCs are missing starting SDC, that has absolutely no bearing on SDC bonuses being bonuses. The OOC SDC bonuses are not, somehow, misprints of what the starting SDC was supposed to be. Which is what the other "valid" assertion is. You could make a case for missing starting SDC, but that's not what was being put forth.

The "Step 2 SDC" (that which all human chars get) is found on page 287. There Are No SDC listings in Any RUE OCC.

There are SDC BONUSES! found in most RUE classes.

I do wish people would say what they are talking about correctly. Misusing words (or leaving them out!) just confuses what is being talked about. Especcilly when the words being used mean something totally different from what Is Being Talked about.

Yes, it does matter when talking about game mechanics.

[Hotrod]

Actually I could see it going either way. It is unfortunately very vague because of the statement regarding all OCC's should have a listed Starting SDC, which they don't.

It's actually not vague at all. Even if the OOCs are missing starting SDC, that has absolutely no bearing on SDC bonuses being bonuses. The OOC SDC bonuses are not, somehow, misprints of what the starting SDC was supposed to be. Which is what the other "valid" assertion is. You could make a case for missing starting SDC, but that's not what was being put forth.

I see it as an issue of author intent. The quoted passage is clearly flawed when it states that OCCs should all have starting SDC and gives a figure to cover the supposedly exceptional case that in fact is every case in the book.

It could be that it's simply a mis-applied jury-rigged solution. There are a lot of OCCs in the book, and when Kevin realized that the SDC bonuses weren't applied in a consistent manner throughout, he threw in this figure to give OCCs like the CS military some balance with the OCCs that have SDC bonuses built in. In applying this quick solution (easier that revising every OCC in the book) He may have mistakenly interpreted the OCC bonuses as a starting OCC. Given that he writes for multiple game systems, some of which have starting SDC values for OCCs, this seems reasonable.

It could be that this section was adapted from another game's text in which every OCC does normally have a starting SDC, and this line slipped through the cracks of the editing process. In this case, the number given is the only starting SDC value in the book, and while it's not ideal (nerdare tougher than CS soldiers?!), it's what we have, so we simply use it as the default for every human character.

Either way, this seems like a significant flaw in a character creation process. It would be nice to get an official answer on this and maybe get another section added to the RUE Errata.

[Hotrod]

Actually I could see it going either way. It is unfortunately very vague because of the statement regarding all OCC's should have a listed Starting SDC, which they don't.

It's actually not vague at all. Even if the OOCs are missing starting SDC, that has absolutely no bearing on SDC bonuses being bonuses. The OOC SDC bonuses are not, somehow, misprints of what the starting SDC was supposed to be. Which is what the other "valid" assertion is. You could make a case for missing starting SDC, but that's not what was being put forth.

The "starting SDC"/"Base SDC" (that which all human chars get) is found on page 287. There Are No Base SDC listings in Any RUE OCC.

There are SDC BONUSES! found in most RUE classes.

I do wish people would say what they are talking about correctly. Misusing words (or leaving them out!) just confuses what is being talked about. Especcilly when the words being used mean something totally different from what Is Being Talked about.

Yes, it does matter when talking about game mechanics.

I don't think anyone here is confusing the issue (unless I made a typo or omission somewhere?). I don't think anyone has disputed the facts of the text. I completely agree that, as written, there are no starting SDC values for any OCC in RUE. Therefore, the by-the-letter interpretation is to use the just-in-case value given as the default for every character. The question is whether or not the rules-as-written are the rules-as-intended when it comes to starting SDC.

There are significant problems with the rules-as-written interpretation. First, it makes some scholarly classes significantly tougher than the professional soldiers presented in RUE. While nerds in Rifts are tougher than most scholars of today, this doesn't seem appropriate. Second, the passage you reference on page 287 is deeply flawed, as I discussed in the post above.

[J_cobbers]

Reading through I would have to go with your 1st interpretation, mostly because I disagree with the basis of your complaint that many nerdy RUE OCCs have SDC bonus as authorial oversight in the revision. Most of them start with few, if any physical OCC skills, and more restrictions on selecting physical skills for OCC related and seconday skills, while Man-at-Arms tend to have fewer restrictions and even bonuses to selected physical skills.

The reason I bring this up is many physical skills add to SDC or PE (increasing HP), and I think that may be why they have a higher bonus starting SDC than the CS military OCCs. (who all start with Running which adds +1 PE, 4d4 spd and 1D6 SDC) So my take is that most combat oriented characters can make up this difference easily by choosing a few physical skills if they desire, especially ones that the scholarly ones can't. I see that is the authorial intent, and probably the reason for the rule change.

[guardiandashi]

Reading through I would have to go with your 1st interpretation, mostly because I disagree with the basis of your complaint that many nerdy RUE OCCs have SDC bonus as authorial oversight in the revision. Most of them start with few, if any physical OCC skills, and more restrictions on selecting physical skills for OCC related and seconday skills, while Man-at-Arms tend to have fewer restrictions and even bonuses to selected physical skills.

The reason I bring this up is many physical skills add to SDC or PE (increasing HP), and I think that may be why they have a higher bonus starting SDC than the CS military OCCs. (who all start with Running which adds +1 PE, 4d4 spd and 1D6 SDC) So my take is that most combat oriented characters can make up this difference easily by choosing a few physical skills if they desire, especially ones that the scholarly ones can't. I see that is the authorial intent, and probably the reason for the rule change.

the thing is historically military Occ's also have MORE sdc than a non military OCC

to use an example and for most of the physical skill sdc bonuses I rolled average or slightly above average I have a "wolf" dogboy who yes has crazy high PE of Supernatural 44, but the char at 1st level has ... 50 hp, and 172 sdc

but I don't think the fact that man at arms types should have to take physical skills to beef up their sdc.

[VictoryWeaver]

Reading through I would have to go with your 1st interpretation, mostly because I disagree with the basis of your complaint that many nerdy RUE OCCs have SDC bonus as authorial oversight in the revision. Most of them start with few, if any physical OCC skills, and more restrictions on selecting physical skills for OCC related and seconday skills, while Man-at-Arms tend to have fewer restrictions and even bonuses to selected physical skills.

The reason I bring this up is many physical skills add to SDC or PE (increasing HP), and I think that may be why they have a higher bonus starting SDC than the CS military OCCs. (who all start with Running which adds +1 PE, 4d4 spd and 1D6 SDC) So my take is that most combat oriented characters can make up this difference easily by choosing a few physical skills if they desire, especially ones that the scholarly ones can't. I see that is the authorial intent, and probably the reason for the rule change.

+1

[Hotrod]

Reading through I would have to go with your 1st interpretation, mostly because I disagree with the basis of your complaint that many nerdy RUE OCCs have SDC bonus as authorial oversight in the revision. Most of them start with few, if any physical OCC skills, and more restrictions on selecting physical skills for OCC related and seconday skills, while Man-at-Arms tend to have fewer restrictions and even bonuses to selected physical skills.

The reason I bring this up is many physical skills add to SDC or PE (increasing HP), and I think that may be why they have a higher bonus starting SDC than the CS military OCCs. (who all start with Running which adds +1 PE, 4d4 spd and 1D6 SDC) So my take is that most combat oriented characters can make up this difference easily by choosing a few physical skills if they desire, especially ones that the scholarly ones can't. I see that is the authorial intent, and probably the reason for the rule change.

You make an excellent point. There is a game balance argument to be made, and if the assumption is that soldiers will take more physical skills, while nerdy classes have fewer options, I might be won over to your interpretation.

Let's compare some OCC related skill lists at level 1 (I'm only counting OCC related that could be applied to physical):
First, the nerd classes:
Rogue Scholar: 7 skill selections, can't take Acrobatics, Gymnastics, Kick Boxing, or Wrestling.
Rogue Scientist: 8 skill selections, can't take Acrobatics, Gymnastics, or Wrestling.
Body Fixer: 8 skill selections, can't take Acrobatics, Boxing, and Wrestling.

Grunt:7 skill selections, can't take Acrobatics.
Military Specialist: 5 skill selections, can't take Acrobatics.
Technical Officer: 3 skill selections, can't take Acrobatics or Wrestling.

Overall: the soldiers have a wider selection, but they can't take as many physical skills. Let's compare the most-restricted of both categories:
Most restrictive nerd vs most restrictive soldier: Even with the restrictions in the class, a Rogue Scholar can take Boxing, Athletics, Aerobic Athletics, Running, Body Building, and Hand to Hand: Expert. The Technical officer can take Boxing, Gymnastics, Hand to Hand: Expert, and he gets Running as an OCC skill. With the same hand-to-hand, the Scholar gets 2 more options for physical skills. The tech officer's gymnastics might count as 2-3 times as useful as some of the physical skills taken by the scholar, but the scholar will get more SDC from his skills than the soldier before OCC bonuses get factored in. Advantage nerd.

Least restrictive nerd vs least restrictive soldier: Rogue Scientist vs Grunt. Rogue scientist takes Hand to Hand: Expert, Boxing, Running, Athletics, Kick Boxing, Aerobics, and Physical Labor. The Grunt gets Expert and Running as OCC skills, then takes Boxing, Gymnastics, Wrestling, Kick Boxing, Aerobic Athletics, Physical Labor, and Athletics. In this case, the Grunt has a small, but significant advantage that may not be wholly countered by the SDC bonus the Rogue Scientist gets. However, when you consider the other bonuses the scientist gets (+4 to perception!) and all the other skill advantages the Rogue Scientist still has from his OCC skills and OCC related skills that must be spent on Science, Medical, and Technical, plus his class-specific skills, I don't think the grunt's advantage is enough to make up for everything else the scientist brings to an adventure.

It's not quite as cut-and-dry of an advantage as I thought it would be, but I'd still say there's a class balance issue on the subject of S.D.C., even if all characters spend all their free time on sports, weight rooms, and otherwise living in denial of their classes' intended roles.

On a side note: I haven't voted yet; haven't made up my mind on this one
And on an unrelated note, I just noticed this: Kick Boxing + Aerobics = roundhouse kicks doing 3D6+2 SDC per attack. Wham!

[eliakon]

I would say that if the SDC has the word "Bonus" or + in it then it is added to the 2d6+12.
It doesn't make me happy, but it does appear to be the way the rules are written, and thus is how I do things when making "by the book" characters for submissions to other peoples games and such. If the number has a flat though... then it is the SDC.
(so basically I am a "NO" but with a "except in a few rare circumstance)

[kaid]

One other aspect to this is consistency. A C.S. Grunt should be a bit tougher than, say, a Body Fixer, Rogue Scholar, or a Rogue Scientist. If we follow the "Base is 2D6+12 for everyone," then the nerd classes are, on average, considerably tougher than the infantry. While that can certainly happen, it should probably be more the exception than the norm.

And due to the physical training skills a CS grunt likely takes that scientists and scholars don't then they would in fact wind up being tougher due to the bonuses to SDC many of those skills grant.

[Hotrod]

One other aspect to this is consistency. A C.S. Grunt should be a bit tougher than, say, a Body Fixer, Rogue Scholar, or a Rogue Scientist. If we follow the "Base is 2D6+12 for everyone," then the nerd classes are, on average, considerably tougher than the infantry. While that can certainly happen, it should probably be more the exception than the norm.

And due to the physical training skills a CS grunt likely takes that scientists and scholars don't then they would in fact wind up being tougher due to the bonuses to SDC many of those skills grant.

I don't follow your logic. With no physical skills selected, Grunts have less SDC. With all available skills selected as physical, it's pretty close. Grunts get 7 OCC related skills, the most of the RUE CS OCCs. Rogue Scientists get 15 and Rogue Scholars and Body Fixers get 11. the number skills the nerd classes get allows them to get about the same amount of benefit from a fraction of their selections that a CS military OCC gets with all of its available selection.

Military OCCs aren't necessarily more likely to spend extra skills on the physical category when there are W.P.'s, piloting skills, military skills, communications, and others.

[Axelmania]

I would consider 'class bonuses' to include the category base/bonus.

For example, and I don't know if they changed this in later reprintings, but I think the Royal Knight OCC is listed as having +10 SDC in addition to the base 1D4x10 that all Men At Arms have, and the Knight OCC is listed has having +20 in addition to that.

So I would keep these bases for the categories (even if Ultimate left them out, perhaps accidentally) and add this new SDC thing as an 'Ultimate bonus' to make people slightly tougher and able to make a couple extra golems.

[Hotrod]

I would consider 'class bonuses' to include the category base/bonus.

For example, and I don't know if they changed this in later reprintings, but I think the Royal Knight OCC is listed as having +10 SDC in addition to the base 1D4x10 that all Men At Arms have, and the Knight OCC is listed has having +20 in addition to that.

So I would keep these bases for the categories (even if Ultimate left them out, perhaps accidentally) and add this new SDC thing as an 'Ultimate bonus' to make people slightly tougher and able to make a couple extra golems.

Nice reference! I like your approach of using the old RUE starting SDC rules, myself, though for the disposable NPCs I'm making, I'll give them the most conservative, least-helpful interpretation, because they're a bunch of expendable mooks.

[J_cobbers]

Reading through I would have to go with your 1st interpretation, mostly because I disagree with the basis of your complaint that many nerdy RUE OCCs have SDC bonus as authorial oversight in the revision. Most of them start with few, if any physical OCC skills, and more restrictions on selecting physical skills for OCC related and seconday skills, while Man-at-Arms tend to have fewer restrictions and even bonuses to selected physical skills.

The reason I bring this up is many physical skills add to SDC or PE (increasing HP), and I think that may be why they have a higher bonus starting SDC than the CS military OCCs. (who all start with Running which adds +1 PE, 4d4 spd and 1D6 SDC) So my take is that most combat oriented characters can make up this difference easily by choosing a few physical skills if they desire, especially ones that the scholarly ones can't. I see that is the authorial intent, and probably the reason for the rule change.

You make an excellent point. There is a game balance argument to be made, and if the assumption is that soldiers will take more physical skills, while nerdy classes have fewer options, I might be won over to your interpretation.

Let's compare some OCC related skill lists at level 1 (I'm only counting OCC related that could be applied to physical):
First, the nerd classes:
Rogue Scholar: 7 skill selections, can't take Acrobatics, Gymnastics, Kick Boxing, or Wrestling.
Rogue Scientist: 8 skill selections, can't take Acrobatics, Gymnastics, or Wrestling.
Body Fixer: 8 skill selections, can't take Acrobatics, Boxing, and Wrestling.

Grunt:7 skill selections, can't take Acrobatics.
Military Specialist: 5 skill selections, can't take Acrobatics.
Technical Officer: 3 skill selections, can't take Acrobatics or Wrestling.

Overall: the soldiers have a wider selection, but they can't take as many physical skills. Let's compare the most-restricted of both categories:
Most restrictive nerd vs most restrictive soldier: Even with the restrictions in the class, a Rogue Scholar can take Boxing, Athletics, Aerobic Athletics, Running, Body Building, and Hand to Hand: Expert. The Technical officer can take Boxing, Gymnastics, Hand to Hand: Expert, and he gets Running as an OCC skill. With the same hand-to-hand, the Scholar gets 2 more options for physical skills. The tech officer's gymnastics might count as 2-3 times as useful as some of the physical skills taken by the scholar, but the scholar will get more SDC from his skills than the soldier before OCC bonuses get factored in. Advantage nerd.

Least restrictive nerd vs least restrictive soldier: Rogue Scientist vs Grunt. Rogue scientist takes Hand to Hand: Expert, Boxing, Running, Athletics, Kick Boxing, Aerobics, and Physical Labor. The Grunt gets Expert and Running as OCC skills, then takes Boxing, Gymnastics, Wrestling, Kick Boxing, Aerobic Athletics, Physical Labor, and Athletics. In this case, the Grunt has a small, but significant advantage that may not be wholly countered by the SDC bonus the Rogue Scientist gets. However, when you consider the other bonuses the scientist gets (+4 to perception!) and all the other skill advantages the Rogue Scientist still has from his OCC skills and OCC related skills that must be spent on Science, Medical, and Technical, plus his class-specific skills, I don't think the grunt's advantage is enough to make up for everything else the scientist brings to an adventure.

It's not quite as cut-and-dry of an advantage as I thought it would be, but I'd still say there's a class balance issue on the subject of S.D.C., even if all characters spend all their free time on sports, weight rooms, and otherwise living in denial of their classes' intended roles.

On a side note: I haven't voted yet; haven't made up my mind on this one
And on an unrelated note, I just noticed this: Kick Boxing + Aerobics = roundhouse kicks doing 3D6+2 SDC per attack. Wham!

Interesting comparisons and you may well have undercut my argument nicely. I think you should also include on the "nerd" side city rats (10 OCC related skills, better selection of physical skills that add bonuses, and bonus SDC), Operators (basically same as Rogue Scientists but 2 skills selected must be mechanical, functionally allowing them to pick 6 physical skills) and Cyber Docs (no bonus SDC, but get 9 OCC Related skills, 2 must be technical skills, and can take any physical skill minus Wrestling and Acrobatics).

Perhaps the ultimate in the Adventurer/Scholar OCCs, for SDC, is the Wilderness scout as he starts with a large SDC bonus, gets Athletics for free, must pick 2 physical OCC related skills and has another 6 slots to add and again has the Acrobatics restriction. One of those ought be used to buy up from H2H Basic, leaving 7 more slots for physical skills. However, it's not a particularly "nerdy" OCC, being more Adventurer and less Scholar.

For Military side you left of the SAMAS pilot who gets 8 skills, and only is restricted from Acrobatics and has H2H Expert. Also look at some of the Non-C.S. options w/o SDC Bonus. The Robot pilot OCC gets 5 skills, but no restrictions on Physical skills. The Merc Soldier Grunt MOS starts with forced march, Running. General Athletics, and one free physical skill and can pick 4 OCC Related skills, having only Acrobatics removed from the physical category.

The other point I'd make is that a lot of non-CS military OCCs in RUE do have SDC bonuses (Cyber Knights, Juciers, Crazies, and Headhunters).

Finally perhaps another reason of authorial intent is that these classes are more likely to be selected by players as compared to CS military OCCs. The CS is usually portrayed as a either in a villainous role, or at the very least an antagonistic one, while the other OCCs are here as primary choices for the players, and thus toughened up a bit. Besides CS military gets other things, like free equipment, weapons, ammo and vehicles for their missions, housing, food, and a regular paycheck. All of those things the other non-CS OCCs have to pay their hard earned credits for. So while the Scholar may bring better skills and some stats to the party as an OCC choice, the Grunt brings gear and stability. Just a bit more food for thought on the subject.

[J_cobbers]

I would consider 'class bonuses' to include the category base/bonus.

For example, and I don't know if they changed this in later reprintings, but I think the Royal Knight OCC is listed as having +10 SDC in addition to the base 1D4x10 that all Men At Arms have, and the Knight OCC is listed has having +20 in addition to that.

So I would keep these bases for the categories (even if Ultimate left them out, perhaps accidentally) and add this new SDC thing as an 'Ultimate bonus' to make people slightly tougher and able to make a couple extra golems.

Nice reference! I like your approach of using the old RUE starting SDC rules, myself, though for the disposable NPCs I'm making, I'll give them the most conservative, least-helpful interpretation, because they're a bunch of expendable mooks.

I doubt this ever got updated, so I would say whenever an OCC references the old SDC category like that, assume that is now it's starting SDC for that OCC. Especially since the RUE's 2D6+12 is for OCCs which do not give a starting SDC. So for your two knights, because they reference the 1d4x10 in the write up that would be their OCC base, and then the +10 or +20 would an OCC bonus to the SDC.

[Axelmania]

That seem to make Knights a lot tougher by comparison to other classes than they used to be.

Like previously, a Royal Knight would have 20-50 SDC and a man at arms like the Coalition Grunt would have 10-40. But now, since they don't (RUE p 231) get an SDC bonus or an SDC base (even scholar classes like the Body Fixer / Scholar / Scientist get SDC bonuses!) they need to take the same 2D6+12 (14 to 24) that a Cyber-Doc gets, who is boosted from their previous 4D6 (4-24).

The disclaimer doesn't seem to make sense internally, compare:
1) Each O.C.C. should indicate how many S.D.C. points a character gets. In the event that it does not,
2) 2D6+12 S.D.C., plus any O.C.C. or R.C.C. bonuses.

The first presents the condition that an OCC does not indicate any SDC points...

The second says in that case, use an amount... plus OCC bonuses... which means the OCC did indicate SDC points you get.

I think it's truer to concept if we keep old SDC system (3D6 for psychics, 4D6 for adventurers/mages, 1D4x10 warriors) and either ignore the 2D6+12 or add it to everyone (or maybe just all humans, to account for how we really ought to be tougher than gnomes) to add some resilence and variability.