multiple attacks: How do you play it?

[Killer Cyborg]

having done paintball, as well as airsoft (which is by no means as loud but certainly just intense), i agree with Eli. you are generally trying to stay aware of where everyone is and what directions they are facing, trying to interpret what they are saying or what they might be signing or covertly signalling is really hard, and it usually requires you to devote most of your attention to that.. which means you can be blindsided by the rest of their team.

so yeah, use the perception rules to determine if someone can figure out "he's casting a spell!" but don't assume that this is like a J-RPG or anime where they have to scream the spell name and do interpretive dance before they can lob their spell,

Consider the argument of "everybody always notices every time a mage casts a spell" have been soundly defeated, and consider myself to be so utterly impressed that I would greatly appreciate your input on one or more arguments that I have actually made:

If you see a guy in combat, and he's wearing traditional mage clothing, and he's waving his arms at you as if he's casting a spell, that's kind of a tip-off.

Or

Spellcasters in the world of Rifts do not usually take measures to avoid being identified.

Or

A guy wearing a gas mask, waving his hands about in intricate patterns, is a) the norm, and b) likely to be able to be spotted on the battlefield.

Or even:
Is it commonly possible for one person to notice another person making hand gestures?

If you say "Yes, always!" then you're wrong. It depends on circumstances.
If you say "No, Never!" then you're wrong. It again depends on circumstances.
If you say "Yes, but it's REALLY HARD," the you're still wrong--it STILL depends on circumstances.

[Killer Cyborg]

If you guys want to test this idea, then next time you play paintball, have one of the members of each team dress up in wizard robes, and have a rule that if they stand within a certain range of you, chanting and gesturing with their hands for 2-3 seconds, that you can consider yourself to have been shot.

Let me know how hard that guy is to spot.

[eliakon]

If you guys want to test this idea, then next time you play paintball, have one of the members of each team dress up in wizard robes, and have a rule that if they stand within a certain range of you, chanting and gesturing with their hands for 2-3 seconds, that you can consider yourself to have been shot.

Let me know how hard that guy is to spot.

Robes that the CE books talk about lots of people wear you mean? (And that is only the Ley Line Walker that is even that stupid. Most of the other classes aren't dumb enough to have that problem)
And they get to hold guns and fire too, since there is nothing in the books to talk about it taking up their hands.
And yeah, chanting for 2-3 seconds is fine, remember everyone will probably have on masks
And a Ref can tag you out if the mage decides to cast a spell that is not visible
Its going to be a lot harder than you think
In fact I bet it is going to have to require a perception roll
Especially if the PC isn't brain damaged and wears normal clothing into battle....or that the entire other team isn't wearing robes. Though there are a lot of people here who seem to think that every mage DOES wander around with big "Shoot me first please" signs. I know that if I were going to go out into a fight I would either wear the same thing the rest of the team was wearing (no robes) or have everyone wear robes.

The ROBES though are a HUGE side issue to the problem of the metagame cheating though.
The metagaming is where people just say "Oh I know he is casting a spell" and shoot the mage as soon as he starts casting (the original problem that sparked this discussion). THAT is flat out cheating.
If you have a plausible way of knowing that the person is casting, and you have the lore skill to know to interrupt SURE go a head and act on it.
Its when everyone though just 'knows' everything with out having to roll, or take a skill that its metagaming.

And NO 'I know about interrupting mages' is not 'free knowledge' unless your GM rules it is. There is a REASON that they have a Lore: Magic skill out there and the CS troops get special training on dealing with mages...
...because it takes special training to know this stuff.

[Killer Cyborg]

If you guys want to test this idea, then next time you play paintball, have one of the members of each team dress up in wizard robes, and have a rule that if they stand within a certain range of you, chanting and gesturing with their hands for 2-3 seconds, that you can consider yourself to have been shot.

Let me know how hard that guy is to spot.

Robes that the CE books talk about lots of people wear you mean?

My bad. I didn't know we were talking about the Chaos Earth setting.
When'd that happen...?

But no, if you want to be accurate, go with the traditional ley line walker garb as it'd described in the books.

(And that is only the Ley Line Walker that is even that stupid. Most of the other classes aren't dumb enough to have that problem)

A lot of classes have traditional armor/clothing that they wear.
Line Walkers and other mage classes are some of them.

And they get to hold guns and fire too, since there is nothing in the books to talk about it taking up their hands.

Sure. If they can make mudras while holding guns, cool.

And yeah, chanting for 2-3 seconds is fine, remember everyone will probably have on masks

Probably, yes.

And a Ref can tag you out if the mage decides to cast a spell that is not visible
Its going to be a lot harder than you think
In fact I bet it is going to have to require a perception roll

You make Perception rolls when you play paintball?

Especially if the PC isn't brain damaged and wears normal clothing into battle....

See, THAT's a house rule.
There's nothing in the books that states that LLWs who wear traditional LLW clothing are brain damaged.
That's your personal assessment, but there's nothing in the books to support it.

or that the entire other team isn't wearing robes.

In Rifts, how many non-mage OCCs have robes in their starting equipment?
How many are described as traditionally wearing robes?
Or are you going off-book again...?

[quote Though there are a lot of people here who seem to think that every mage DOES wander around with big "Shoot me first please" signs.[/quote]

Nobody I've noticed yet has said anything to that effect.
The books state that mages wear traditional mage clothing.
The books do not (insofar as anybody has yet cited) state that anybody else traditionally wears mage clothing.

But that's the books, not people here.
And "That guy looks like a mage" isn't necessarily a "shoot me first" sign.

I know that if I were going to go out into a fight I would either wear the same thing the rest of the team was wearing (no robes) or have everyone wear robes.

That's nice.

The ROBES though are a HUGE side issue to the problem of the metagame cheating though.
The metagaming is where people just say "Oh I know he is casting a spell" and shoot the mage as soon as he starts casting (the original problem that sparked this discussion). THAT is flat out cheating.

Again, I don't know who or what you're talking about.
All I've been talking about is that I don't think that it's out of the question--or even very unusual--for people to notice when the guy in traditional mage gear starts chanting and gesturing with his/her hands.
You seem to think that spellcasting is necessarily covert as a rule, but there's nothing in the books indicating that it IS. There are descriptions that technically allow for it to be covert, but nothing that indicates that it is covert as a rule.
If mages were big on being covert, they wouldn't likely have traditional garb that identifies them as mages.

If you have a plausible way of knowing that the person is casting, and you have the lore skill to know to interrupt SURE go a head and act on it.

When the guy who's dressed like a mage starts chanting and gesturing, how much lore skill do you think it takes to guess that he's casting a spell?
That's the mage equivalent of reaching into your coat pocket--you might be doing something else, but in a combat situation people who see you do it are probably going to assume it's a gun, whether or not they have Firearms Lore skills.

Its when everyone though just 'knows' everything with out having to roll, or take a skill that its metagaming.

That's great.
I'm glad that you clarified this specific scenario that nobody has been talking about.

And NO 'I know about interrupting mages' is not 'free knowledge' unless your GM rules it is.

Congratulations on introducing a new subject of discussion and defeating that discussion all in one sentence.
That's very concise.

[Blue_Lion]

A first level mage is as much a specialist in casting as a SF is in combat with +4 to save vs horror factor, not some one that is easily rattled or thrown off their game.

NOT so much.
Mages as a rule are not combat-trained characters.

Let me ask you this do you allow a lvl 1 charter to do a aimed shot in combat without penalty?

Sure.
And Mages don't get a penalty to cast spells.
They're just prone to speaking loudly sometimes in tense situations.

Making them talk loudly so every one knows they cast a spell is a penalty unless you require them to do it all the time.

Mages may not be as a rule combat trained, but they are trained to focus in tense situations.

[Killer Cyborg]

A first level mage is as much a specialist in casting as a SF is in combat with +4 to save vs horror factor, not some one that is easily rattled or thrown off their game.

NOT so much.
Mages as a rule are not combat-trained characters.

Let me ask you this do you allow a lvl 1 charter to do a aimed shot in combat without penalty?

Sure.
And Mages don't get a penalty to cast spells.
They're just prone to speaking loudly sometimes in tense situations.

Making them talk loudly so every one knows they cast a spell is a penalty unless you require them to do it all the time.

Is requiring a shot to be Wild, or a snap shot, a penalty unless it's required all the time?

Mages may not be as a rule combat trained, but they are trained to focus in tense situations.

And you know what helps them focus?
Talking and making hand gestures.

[Blue_Lion]

A first level mage is as much a specialist in casting as a SF is in combat with +4 to save vs horror factor, not some one that is easily rattled or thrown off their game.

NOT so much.
Mages as a rule are not combat-trained characters.

Let me ask you this do you allow a lvl 1 charter to do a aimed shot in combat without penalty?

Sure.
And Mages don't get a penalty to cast spells.
They're just prone to speaking loudly sometimes in tense situations.

Making them talk loudly so every one knows they cast a spell is a penalty unless you require them to do it all the time.

Is requiring a shot to be Wild, or a snap shot, a penalty unless it's required all the time?

Mages may not be as a rule combat trained, but they are trained to focus in tense situations.

And you know what helps them focus?
Talking and making hand gestures.

Shooting wild is -6. By the rules it is not required all the time so is a penalty, if it was required all the time it would not be a penalty because no action caused it that makes it the normal state of the game. This is using the most applicable definition of penalty "disadvantage, loss, or hardship due to some action" from your favorite https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/penalty


It may help them focus but it does not have to be loud or grand hand and arm signals to help them.

Think about what you are saying, a guy with a +4 to save vs horror factor is rattled(scared) and has to talk loud while a person without a bonus to save vs horror factor can focus on doing a aimed shot with no penalty in combat.

You keep harping on mages as a rule not being combat trained to justify them being thrown off.
You ignore the fact that they are some of the hardest charters to scare, ignore the fact they are trained to ignore stress and do things the same way. You ignore the fact they are some of the most focused individuals in the game and have them act scared and shout thier spells in combat like some untrained newb.

[eliakon]

And they get to hold guns and fire too, since there is nothing in the books to talk about it taking up their hands.

Sure. If they can make mudras while holding guns, cool.

YOU are the one claiming that you need hands free.
So you get to back it up.

Because there is NOTHING in the books anywhere talking about this 'hands free' crap
So that is 100% your house rule there.

Its rather important because in games where there ARE obvious major somatic components they DO talk about needing hands free to cast.
But nope, in Palladium you DO NOT NEED A FREE HAND TO CAST.
So those gestures you love? They don't need free hands.
We know that tying up a mage doesn't stop casting
We know you can cast while holding staves (its one of the favorite things after all...)

Or is there just something magical about guns that interferes with spell casting?

[Killer Cyborg]

A first level mage is as much a specialist in casting as a SF is in combat with +4 to save vs horror factor, not some one that is easily rattled or thrown off their game.

NOT so much.
Mages as a rule are not combat-trained characters.

Let me ask you this do you allow a lvl 1 charter to do a aimed shot in combat without penalty?

Sure.
And Mages don't get a penalty to cast spells.
They're just prone to speaking loudly sometimes in tense situations.

Making them talk loudly so every one knows they cast a spell is a penalty unless you require them to do it all the time.

Is requiring a shot to be Wild, or a snap shot, a penalty unless it's required all the time?

Mages may not be as a rule combat trained, but they are trained to focus in tense situations.

And you know what helps them focus?
Talking and making hand gestures.

Shooting wild is -6.

IIRC, if you have the right WP, it's just a flat roll.

By the rules it is not required all the time so is a penalty, if it was required all the time it would not be a penalty because no action caused it that makes it the normal state of the game. This is using the most applicable definition of penalty "disadvantage, loss, or hardship due to some action" from your favorite https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/penalty

Okay... I'm not going to disagree, but I'm not sure of your point.
Unless you're saying that mages shouldn't ever get circumstantial penalties, even though other people get circumstantial penalties at things they're trained to do?

It may help them focus but it does not have to be loud or grand hand and arm signals to help them.

We do not have enough information to say for certain how KS meant the spoken words and the hand gestures to seem.
I see no reason to believe that he meant for it to be whispers and slight moves of a finger-tip as a rule.

Think about what you are saying, a guy with a +4 to save vs horror factor is rattled(scared) and has to talk loud while a person without a bonus to save vs horror factor can focus on doing a aimed shot with no penalty in combat.

a) Not sure where you're getting the +4 to save vs. Horror. Is that LLWs? All mages? Just one hypothetical mage?
b) That guy doing an aimed shot "with no penalty?" He's spending an extra attack in order to focus, even though he's well-trained.

You keep harping on mages as a rule not being combat trained to justify them being thrown off.

Actually, I'm pointing out two things:
1. It's not unusual for people to speak loudly--or even yell--during combat, regardless of training.
2. Mages aren't even (as a rule) trained for combat.

You ignore the fact that they are some of the hardest charters to scare,

Because that's not true.
A bonus to HF is a bonus to HF, not a bonus to save vs. all fears, anxieties, and distractions.

ignore the fact they are trained to ignore stress and do things the same way.

I'm not ignoring that at all. I'm just not giving that the power to over-rule general human nature and a complete lack of any official mention of mages performing the kind of stealth-casting that you guys seem to think is typical.

You ignore the fact they are some of the most focused individuals in the game and have them act scared and shout thier spells in combat like some untrained newb.

What do you think level 1 characters ARE, if not newbs?
Level 1 soldiers panic in combat, and they're trained for it.
Because at level 1, you're at the bottom of the barrel experience-wise.

[Nekira Sudacne]

A first level mage is as much a specialist in casting as a SF is in combat with +4 to save vs horror factor, not some one that is easily rattled or thrown off their game.

NOT so much.
Mages as a rule are not combat-trained characters.

Tell that to a battle magus.

[Killer Cyborg]

And they get to hold guns and fire too, since there is nothing in the books to talk about it taking up their hands.

Sure. If they can make mudras while holding guns, cool.

YOU are the one claiming that you need hands free.

I am...?

Care to quote where I made that claim?

in Palladium you DO NOT NEED A FREE HAND TO CAST.

In Palladium, mages commonly make hand gestures as part of helping them focus. That is canon.
Whether they can or can not make such gestures, and what such gestures entail, is speculation.

[Killer Cyborg]

A first level mage is as much a specialist in casting as a SF is in combat with +4 to save vs horror factor, not some one that is easily rattled or thrown off their game.

NOT so much.
Mages as a rule are not combat-trained characters.

Tell that to a battle magus.

Sure thing.
They already know that they're not the rule--they're exceptional.


(Oh, since you bring them up, I'll point out that they have their own specific armor that they wear that marks them not only as mages, but as Battle Mages specifically. Again, mages don't seem to typically hide their nature.)

[Blue_Lion]

I see no point in you bringing up untrained shooters without the skill to use a weapon. Please explain how it is related to me addressing your point on shooting wild or snap shots.

My point is you said you allowed any one that is level 1 to do a called shot(requires concentration) in combat without a penalty while the person trained to concentration to spell cast get a penalty to do that.

I never said they should not get a penalty, but my point is simply being in combat does not mean you get a penalty.

A level 1 soldier does not have a +4 to horror factor and are easily pan iced a mage is not.

Mechanically there is no special case to set precedence for greater penalties for being bottom barrel experience wise. If you want to make combat scary then use the shell shock HF of 12 found in SoT. That seams to be what you are implying is how you want combat to work. (You will notice the mage is better at dealing with that than a CS grunt. Why because the mage is trained to ignore the stress and emotions he is feeling.)

As I said there is something I say to help me concentrate on something that requires allot of focus, saying it louder does not help it work any better. I simply say it the same way every time quietly to myself it is the repetitive action that helps trigger the mind set concentrate not the volume it is done at. I find changing it at all, such as louder actually makes it harder to work.

[Killer Cyborg]

I see no point in you bringing up untrained shooters without the skill to use a weapon. Please explain how it is related to me addressing your point on shooting wild or snap shots.

You lost me.
You said that firing Wild was at -6, but from what I remember that's not true of skilled shooters, only unskilled shooters.

My point is you said you allowed any one that is level 1 to do a called shot (requires concentration) in combat without a penalty while the person trained to concentration to spell cast get a penalty to do that.

What penalty?
And is it greater than the 2-3 attacks required to make a Called Shot?

I never said they should not get a penalty, but my point is simply being in combat does not mean you get a penalty.

Sounds like you're saying that mages would potentially have trouble keeping calm and reciting their spell in a whisper or a normal voice under certain circumstances.

A level 1 soldier does not have a +4 to horror factor and are easily pan iced a mage is not.

You're confusing two different things: HF bonus, and panic.
And you're leaving out simple distraction.

Also, I suspect that there are some soldiers that have a +4 bonus to HF at first level, and that there are some mages who do not have that bonus.

Mechanically there is no special case to set precedence for greater penalties for being bottom barrel experience wise.

If you think that the proper way to roleplay a 1st level mage with no combat training is to have him/her always be 100% calm in every firefight, regardless of circumstances, then play your mages that way.
I don't think that it's realistic.

If you want to make combat scary

I love how I'm getting both "You can't see somebody gesture with their hands during combat! It's too confusing, and you get tunnel vision, and it's hard to focus on stuff!!" on one hand, and "Combat can only interfere with focus if you fail your HF check!" on the other.

As I said there is something I say to help me concentrate on something that requires allot of focus, saying it louder does not help it work any better.

That's a sample size of 1.
Ask around.
Ideally, ask people who are saying things that help them focus their will into reality-bending magic.

[Blue_Lion]

Shooting wild is -6 for both skilled and unskilled shooters.
PG 361 RUE
"Shooting wild: Has a penalty of -6 to strike and applies even to trained weapons exerts"

Thanks for pointing out my point there is no other penalty applied for called shot other than taking the called shot. My point was you where adding a penalty not in the book to mages but not doing something similar to non mages.

Tunnel vision is a focus on something immediately in front of you to the point you ignore all else. Your brain is filtering out all distractions between you and what you are focusing on. Tunnel vision would make spell casting easier as you would ignore the distractions in casting a spell.

The combat is scary is coming from you, it is not something you are getting provided but my attempt to understand your point.

I have been constant in what I have been saying mages are trained to to ignore distraction and with tunnel vision in combat makes noticing what is going on around you hard to notice a mage casting in combat. So in combat unless you are already focused on the mage noticing he casting a spell may be hard to do.

(Normally you are fairly spot in rules lore are you filling all right?)

[Killer Cyborg]

Shooting wild is -6 for both skilled and unskilled shooters.
PG 361 RUE
"Shooting wild: Has a penalty of -6 to strike and applies even to trained weapons exerts"

Well cited.

I was going by RMB. Forgot that they changed it.

Thanks for pointing out my point there is no other penalty applied for called shot other than taking the called shot. My point was you where adding a penalty not in the book to mages but not doing something similar to non mages.

It all depends on how you define "penalty."
I'd consider "speaks louder than intended sometimes" or "has to speak loudly in order to focus will" to be less of a penalty in most situations than "must take an extra attack in order for the action to occur."

Tunnel vision is a focus on something immediately in front of you to the point you ignore all else. Your brain is filtering out all distractions between you and what you are focusing on. Tunnel vision would make spell casting easier as you would ignore the distractions in casting a spell.

That depends on what you're tunnel-visioning on. If it happens to be the guy you want to cast a spell at, and your speech is not impaired by the loss of hearing, then yeah, it could help.
But if you're tunnel-visioning on the barrel of one guy's gun, and you need to be casting a spell at somebody else, then it's a big problem.

The combat is scary is coming from you, it is not something you are getting provided but my attempt to understand your point.

If you want to understand, then here you go:
Yes, combat is scary. It's also distracting. It's generally a very tense environment that is NOT conducive to focus and conversation, for more reasons than just fear.

I have been constant in what I have been saying mages are trained to to ignore distraction and with tunnel vision in combat makes noticing what is going on around you hard to notice a mage casting in combat. So in combat unless you are already focused on the mage noticing he casting a spell may be hard to do.

a) Well let's start with THAT, because I've already asked somebody once, and I don't recall an answer:
What happens if the mage IS the person that you're focused on? Is it unlikely that you'd notice hand gestures?
If nobody is currently shooting noisy weapons, and you're within earshot of whatever voice level he's speaking at, is it unlikely that you'd notice him chanting?

b) Yes, mages are trained to ignore distraction. JUST LIKE MOST OTHER ADVENTURERS.
If they have some kind of universal concentration powers that mean that they never flub their vocals, or get excited and speak loudly, I have yet to see a citation of the relevant passage.

[Nightmask]

A first level mage is as much a specialist in casting as a SF is in combat with +4 to save vs horror factor, not some one that is easily rattled or thrown off their game.

NOT so much.
Mages as a rule are not combat-trained characters.

Tell that to a battle magus.

Yes don't think I've ever seen such a rule plus combat training isn't the same as combat experience, while it is meant to prepare you for combat that doesn't mean you'll actually respond properly when the time comes. That requires experience to fully develop and anyone can manage that, so any mage who's had to deal with combat especially after several battles is going to end up rating as combat-experienced and not going to have problems (i.e. game penalties) in combat.

[eliakon]

And they get to hold guns and fire too, since there is nothing in the books to talk about it taking up their hands.

Sure. If they can make mudras while holding guns, cool.

YOU are the one claiming that you need hands free.

I am...?

Care to quote where I made that claim?

in Palladium you DO NOT NEED A FREE HAND TO CAST.

In Palladium, mages commonly make hand gestures as part of helping them focus. That is canon.
Whether they can or can not make such gestures, and what such gestures entail, is speculation.

Then provide a citation ANYWHERE that restraining a mages hands will stop spell casting.
We have some pretty extensive discussions of spell casting in several books through out the megaverse...
and not a single one of them suggests a single thing about needing two hands free. Or even needing one hand free
Just that some (undefined) gestures are common.
Anything more than that is a house rule.
Any game limitations imposed on a mage therefore is 100% a house rule.
As written you can not cast if you are gagged, or if your muted, or if your mouth is paralyzed...
there is zilch about if you have something in your hand...
...but there is a TON of stuff about magic wands, magic staves, magic fetishies, magic items, magic weapons of every stripe...
...almost as if holding things in your hand isn't a problem or concern of mages at all.

[eliakon]

A first level mage is as much a specialist in casting as a SF is in combat with +4 to save vs horror factor, not some one that is easily rattled or thrown off their game.

NOT so much.
Mages as a rule are not combat-trained characters.

Tell that to a battle magus.

Sure thing.
They already know that they're not the rule--they're exceptional.


(Oh, since you bring them up, I'll point out that they have their own specific armor that they wear that marks them not only as mages, but as Battle Mages specifically. Again, mages don't seem to typically hide their nature.)

So what about
Mystics
Temporal Mages
Shifters
Necromancers
Combat Mages
Conjurers
Sky Knights
Stone Mages
Diabolists
Line Drawers
Mystic Kyznya
Witches
Night Witches
Gypsy Witches
African Witches
Rain Dancers
Biomancers
Gene-mages
Ocean Wizards
Sea Druids
Whale Singers
Grey Seers
Temporal Warriors
.
.
.
How many classes of mages DO have a specific dress code vs how many don't... the answer seems to be "most don't"


This is of course setting aside the fact that other possibly on duty Mystic Knight or Magus no mage has to wear anything.
And since the books about places like the 'burbs go to lengths to talk about 'fitting in' I would be pretty leery of anyone arguing that a mage HAS to dress a certain way Or Else.

[Killer Cyborg]

A first level mage is as much a specialist in casting as a SF is in combat with +4 to save vs horror factor, not some one that is easily rattled or thrown off their game.

NOT so much.
Mages as a rule are not combat-trained characters.

Tell that to a battle magus.

Sure thing.
They already know that they're not the rule--they're exceptional.


(Oh, since you bring them up, I'll point out that they have their own specific armor that they wear that marks them not only as mages, but as Battle Mages specifically. Again, mages don't seem to typically hide their nature.)

So what about...

Well, first, does this mean that you're ceding the point about LLWs, then...?
Are you in effect saying, "Sure, LLWs and Battle Mages don't take much effort to hide who they are as a rule, and are therefore recognizable pretty easily as mages, but I'm not sure about these other guys..."

Because I'd like to have the most blatant "we like to dress the part" classes nailed down to the point where we're both on the same page as much as possible before moving on to other classes.
If you don't agree about LLWs, you're not likely to change your mind in cases where it's less blatant what the standard behavior is.

[Killer Cyborg]

In Palladium, mages commonly make hand gestures as part of helping them focus. That is canon.
Whether they can or can not make such gestures, and what such gestures entail, is speculation.

Then provide a citation ANYWHERE that restraining a mages hands will stop spell casting.[/quote]

You just introduced the argument.
Maybe you should defend it?

We have some pretty extensive discussions of spell casting in several books through out the megaverse...
and not a single one of them suggests a single thing about needing two hands free. Or even needing one hand free

And nothing about them NOT needing one or two hands free.

Just that some (undefined) gestures are common.
Anything more than that is a house rule.

Yup.
Claiming that mages can always cast freely while carrying weapons IS a house rule, I agree.
Claiming that their hand gestures are necessarily or commonly small gestures IS a house rule.
As is claiming that it's necessarily the opposite of that.

Glad to have you on board at last.

[quoteAny game limitations imposed on a mage therefore is 100% a house rule.
As written you can not cast if you are gagged, or if your muted, or if your mouth is paralyzed...
there is zilch about if you have something in your hand...[/quote]

Yup. Were left in a void of information when it comes to that.

...but there is a TON of stuff about magic wands, magic staves, magic fetishies, magic items, magic weapons of every stripe...
...almost as if holding things in your hand isn't a problem or concern of mages at all.

Uh, no.
Not unless you find lots of stuff about mages casting spells personally while they're holding staves and such in their hands.
(No, casting spells through the object in their hands doesn't count.)

[Killer Cyborg]

A first level mage is as much a specialist in casting as a SF is in combat with +4 to save vs horror factor, not some one that is easily rattled or thrown off their game.

NOT so much.
Mages as a rule are not combat-trained characters.

Tell that to a battle magus.

Yes don't think I've ever seen such a rule

Le sigh.

http://www.dictionary.com/browse/as--a--rule
Idioms
23. as a rule, generally; usually:
He arrives at eleven o'clock, as a rule.

plus combat training isn't the same as combat experience, while it is meant to prepare you for combat that doesn't mean you'll actually respond properly when the time comes.

Agreed.
This is one reason why I don't take "but they're trained to concentrate" to mean "they can automatically always concentrate fully successfully even in the most rigorous of battle conditions."

That requires experience to fully develop and anyone can manage that, so any mage who's had to deal with combat especially after several battles is going to end up rating as combat-experienced and not going to have problems (i.e. game penalties) in combat.

How about "any mage who's had sufficient combat experience is going to be able to focus more easily during battles"...?
Because our point of difference here is that you think it's "a couple of battles," and I'd expect it more to be reflected by experience levels.

[Killer Cyborg]

SoT1 25
Identification of practitioners of magic (limited).
Experienced troops can recognize insignias, likely magic symbols, and the style of dress the various Magic OCCs use to distinguish themselves from one another. For example, they know Techno-Wizards typically wear leather jackets and other types of leather clothing and have gadgets and gizmos; Mystics tend to wear hooded cloaks and robes along with colorful, rich and flamboyant clothing, and their faces are seldom covers. Shifters tend to wear dark colors, leather, spikes and extravagant jewelry made of silver, gold, and gems, and are often accompanied by inhuman creatures; Warlocks usually wear cloaks, robes and jewelry in the color of their elemental master and discipline; Necromancers wear bones and dismembered body parts; Conjurers often look more like chiseled fighters and often have minimal weapons because they can create what they need out of thin air; Tattooed Men are also muscular and their bodies covered in tattoos, while Stone Mages wear silken robes and armlets, bands, mantles and jewelry with a distinctly ancient Egyptian appearance.
And then there is the Ley Line Walker, the most common and (arguably) powerful of the practitioners of magic. These wizards typically wear loose clothing, hooded capes, almost always cover their mouths or faces to some degree and typically wear ornamental headgear. They also often wear belts of cloth or leather that bear runes or other mystic symbols.
The experienced Coalition soldier stationed at the Tolkeen front also knows most practitioners of magic can not wear full armor, only bits and pieces that typically protect the chest and/or shoulders and forearms.[/i]

SoT1 26
In combat, these spell weavers often hang back from the most intense combat and attack from a distance. Spell casters use hand gestures, drawing mystic symbols in the air, and must verbally speak their incantations. In fact, this is one reason why Ley Line Walkers wear air filters, gas masks, or other coverings over their mouths and why many others wear hoods to conceal their faces as well as identify. When these actions are observed, especially if there are other corresponding features like appearance or the presence of the supernatural, it can be surmised that the individual is a wizard of some sort and should be a priority target.

So from there, we know that many types of mages do have common forms of dress.
We found the source for the previous claim that LLWs wear masks specifically to hide their mouths while casting.
We know that many CS soldiers (and presumably many other kinds of adventurers with experience or knowledge of mages) can often identify mages during combat.
We know that the "hand gestures" involves "drawing mystic symbols in the air."


Edit:

SoT1 31
Anti-Magic Tactics
Containment & Restraint
Handcuffs & Restraints
Some strong material is typically used to bind the sorcerer's hands to impair the weaving of magic...

(I don't take this to mean that mages can't cast spells while their hands are bound. My interpretation is that this simply means that some mages can't concentrate/focus as well on casting without their habitual hand gestures to help them focus.)
(Then again...)

RUE 186
Step 5: Understanding Magic
Spell magic requires spoken incantations and hand gestures that serves as a focus to cast magic.

RUE 189
2. To cast a spell requires verbalization--the speaking of the spell invocation. The mantra of the spell must be spoken aloud and with authority. Hand gestures are also usually part of the spell casting process that helps focus and direct the mystic energy.

RUE 190
Can't cast magic when under direct attack.
...
The same is true if he is doing the physical attacking, or running or performing any physical action. To cast a spell the practitioner of magic will need to stop, catch his breath (that should count as one or two of his melee actions/attacks) and then cast his spell (another one or more of his melee actions depending on the spell level).

These are the mighty masters of flawless concentration.
After performing "any physical action," they must stop and catch their breath for an attack/action or two before casting.
This does not indicate to me that they never have trouble concentrating. Quite the reverse.

[Blue_Lion]

Shooting wild is -6 for both skilled and unskilled shooters.
PG 361 RUE
"Shooting wild: Has a penalty of -6 to strike and applies even to trained weapons exerts"

Well cited.

I was going by RMB. Forgot that they changed it.

Thanks for pointing out my point there is no other penalty applied for called shot other than taking the called shot. My point was you where adding a penalty not in the book to mages but not doing something similar to non mages.

It all depends on how you define "penalty."
I'd consider "speaks louder than intended sometimes" or "has to speak loudly in order to focus will" to be less of a penalty in most situations than "must take an extra attack in order for the action to occur."

Tunnel vision is a focus on something immediately in front of you to the point you ignore all else. Your brain is filtering out all distractions between you and what you are focusing on. Tunnel vision would make spell casting easier as you would ignore the distractions in casting a spell.

That depends on what you're tunnel-visioning on. If it happens to be the guy you want to cast a spell at, and your speech is not impaired by the loss of hearing, then yeah, it could help.
But if you're tunnel-visioning on the barrel of one guy's gun, and you need to be casting a spell at somebody else, then it's a big problem.

The combat is scary is coming from you, it is not something you are getting provided but my attempt to understand your point.

If you want to understand, then here you go:
Yes, combat is scary. It's also distracting. It's generally a very tense environment that is NOT conducive to focus and conversation, for more reasons than just fear.

I have been constant in what I have been saying mages are trained to to ignore distraction and with tunnel vision in combat makes noticing what is going on around you hard to notice a mage casting in combat. So in combat unless you are already focused on the mage noticing he casting a spell may be hard to do.

a) Well let's start with THAT, because I've already asked somebody once, and I don't recall an answer:
What happens if the mage IS the person that you're focused on? Is it unlikely that you'd notice hand gestures?
If nobody is currently shooting noisy weapons, and you're within earshot of whatever voice level he's speaking at, is it unlikely that you'd notice him chanting?

b) Yes, mages are trained to ignore distraction. JUST LIKE MOST OTHER ADVENTURERS.
If they have some kind of universal concentration powers that mean that they never flub their vocals, or get excited and speak loudly, I have yet to see a citation of the relevant passage.

Actually most other adventures are not as well trained to ignore distractions(or even trained to at all). Focusing and ignoring distraction is a big part of a mages training for years. A Juicers training is less focused on ignoring things he uses drugs to remove pain and alter his perception. A grunt is likely trained in about the same time as a US infantry man something like 3 months, mages spend years learning to bend reality with their will. But you want me to believe that the grunt is trained to ignore distractions like a mage.

As to A; if the mage is your target of your focus then yes you can see what he is doing, does not mean you will always know what he does. It depends how out of place the actions look and what you know about mages. The range to the target may also play a factor into telling what he does. At 100 feet some things you could see his movements fairly clearly(unless he is hidden behind a bush, or some other terrain feature), at 2000 feet you may not be able to see anything he does.

[eliakon]

In Palladium, mages commonly make hand gestures as part of helping them focus. That is canon.
Whether they can or can not make such gestures, and what such gestures entail, is speculation.

Then provide a citation ANYWHERE that restraining a mages hands will stop spell casting.

You just introduced the argument.
Maybe you should defend it?

No, your the one making the argument that mages need free hands to cast spells.
Its your argument you get to defend it.
I am defending the status quo which is that the rules as written list what is needed to cast spells and what prevents them.

We have some pretty extensive discussions of spell casting in several books through out the megaverse...
and not a single one of them suggests a single thing about needing two hands free. Or even needing one hand free

And nothing about them NOT needing one or two hands free.

They tell us what IS required.
That is what is required. What is not mentioned then is not required.
That is how it works.
I don't have to prove a negative
I don't have to prove that you don't have to wear blue to cast spells, someone would have to prove that you DO.

Just that some (undefined) gestures are common.
Anything more than that is a house rule.

Yup.
Claiming that mages can always cast freely while carrying weapons IS a house rule, I agree.
Claiming that their hand gestures are necessarily or commonly small gestures IS a house rule.
As is claiming that it's necessarily the opposite of that.

Actually you are wrong there.
Mages can always cast freely while carrying weapons in RAW
we know this because there is no rule that says otherwise.
Now if you can prove that there is a rule forbidding this action then fine, otherwise as it is not listed as one of the required parts of spell casting IT IS NOT PART OF THE REQUIRED BITS OF SPELLCASTING.

Glad to have you on board at last.

Its sad to hear that you are not though.

Any game limitations imposed on a mage therefore is 100% a house rule.
As written you can not cast if you are gagged, or if your muted, or if your mouth is paralyzed...
there is zilch about if you have something in your hand...

Yup. Were left in a void of information when it comes to that.

Which is why adding in rules is called 'house rules'
See we are told what you need to do to cast spells. We are told what prevents that.
Adding to either list is a house change to the rules.

...but there is a TON of stuff about magic wands, magic staves, magic fetishies, magic items, magic weapons of every stripe...
...almost as if holding things in your hand isn't a problem or concern of mages at all.

Uh, no.
Not unless you find lots of stuff about mages casting spells personally while they're holding staves and such in their hands.
(No, casting spells through the object in their hands doesn't count.)

Your making up the imaginary rule that you have to have hands free to cast spells
If you want that rule to be in effect that's cool
But its either a house rule, or you need to find rule based support for it.
The current books don't say anything about needing to have hands free
The standard is that you CAN do things unless the book says otherwise.
The book says you must have your mouth free to cast
The book does not say you must have your hands free to cast
That means that gags no, guns yes
The rules tend to be of "that which is not forbidden is allowed" when it comes to open actions.
That is why it was not until the rules came up and said that wearing armor interfered with casting that it did. Even though some GMs felt that armor was not 'mage like'

So no, the standard here is that if you want to argue that mages need to have a certain number of free hands to cast spells, then YOU need to support that. I don't have to support that they don't.

[Killer Cyborg]

In Palladium, mages commonly make hand gestures as part of helping them focus. That is canon.
Whether they can or can not make such gestures, and what such gestures entail, is speculation.

Then provide a citation ANYWHERE that restraining a mages hands will stop spell casting.

You just introduced the argument.
Maybe you should defend it?

No, your the one making the argument that mages need free hands to cast spells.

I am?
Quote where I said that.

We have some pretty extensive discussions of spell casting in several books through out the megaverse...
and not a single one of them suggests a single thing about needing two hands free. Or even needing one hand free

And nothing about them NOT needing one or two hands free.

They tell us what IS required.[/quote]

Correct.
Hand gestures are needed, specifically "drawing mystic symbols."
It doesn't tell us if these gestures and symbols are intricate enough to be made with hands that are full or not.

Mages can always cast freely while carrying weapons in RAW
we know this because there is no rule that says otherwise.

That's not how RAW works.
Otherwise, Vagabonds could fly by flapping their arms, since there's no rule that says otherwise.

[Killer Cyborg]

As to A; if the mage is your target of your focus then yes you can see what he is doing, does not mean you will always know what he does.

Great.
Since I've never made the argument that everybody will always know when a mage casts a spell, let's just look at the bolded portion:
If you're looking at a mage, then you can reasonably notice him making hand gestures, depending on circumstances.

Welcome to the wonderful world of what I've been saying all along.

[guardiandashi]

while it doesn't specifically say what form the hand gestures take, I could see it as a range.

one example is if you read the series by Wen Spencer, Tinker, wolf who rules, elfhome, etc.
in that series for the Domina (elves) to cast spells they use their fingers, and vocalizations that trigger spell effects, their finger gestures have at least 4 possible positions for each finger from fully straight to bent at each joint, that basically count as a "hotkey, or toolbar" with approximately 1,048,576 possible combinations separated into at least 3 elemental "families" that you have to have the right genetic inheritance to access the spells. but some of the spells work by a combination of gestures to "select the spell" sometimes 1 of both hands, then once triggered, some gestures "refine" the settings for the spell, for example when casting a "shield" spell 1 hand has to stay in the shield position (or the spell is canceled) while the other hand can be used to adjust settings such as shape, size and similar. other spells like a fireball, may use additional gestures to control range, size, intensity and similar. (these gestures might be fairly subtle)

on the other extreme you might have to do things like the dragonball power casting such as a Kamehameha, spirit bomb and similar.

[Jefffar]

Time for a chill out