Glitter Boy Killer Mini-Missile Question

[RockJock]

Does anyone have a newer copy of CWC that shows the launch rate for the GB-Killer's mini-missiles?

Thanks.

[Axelmania]

I don't know if they ever added that, but I know they finally included the missiles in the Cuticle Invasion Writeup. I think something like 1/2/5/10 as options.

Don't forget to make called shots to hit the main body of the boomgun Standard tactic, per CWC.

Might be unable to do called shots with volleys though. I think you can't do them with bursts and I think volleys count as bursts.

[guardiandashi]

I don't know if they ever added that, but I know they finally included the missiles in the Cuticle Invasion Writeup. I think something like 1/2/5/10 as options.

Don't forget to make called shots to hit the main body of the boomgun Standard tactic, per CWC.

Might be unable to do called shots with volleys though. I think you can't do them with bursts and I think volleys count as bursts.

sorry axel the boomgun does NOT have a main body. this was gone over repeatedly in another thread. if you follow the rules as written the minimissiles can ONLY hit the main body of the glitterboy, NOT the boom gun because it is part of the glitter boy.

[Blue_Lion]

The tactic refers to out dated rules where only guided missiles hit the main body and mini missiles were the only unguided missile. RUE changed that, all missiles including mini missiles hit the main body.(Means it is not possible by RAW to hit the boom gun) AS was pointed out to you before the boom gun is a hit location of a GB as such the GB has the main body not the boom gun. Vollies use the missile combat rules, they are not burst and they always hit the main body.(Because missiles always hit the main body.)

[13eowulf]

Looking at CWC 5th edition Dec 2006:
The Glitter Boy Killer Power Armor does not have mini missiles.
It has a plasma gun, an Ion gun, a grenade launcher (single shot or volleys of 2), Vibro Blades, railgun arms, and a triple barrel laser turret.
But no missiles, mini or otherwise.

And while you cant make called shots with missiles, I am not sure the same applies to grenades, I would have to check.

[RockJock]

Thanks guys. I have a 1st printing, it talks about 10 minis in the fluff, but not in the description.

[Blue_Lion]

As I understand it was suppose to have 10 mini missiles but they where left out and never added to a reprint. I think the FaQ in the cutting room floor has a errata for them being added. If I recall they can all be fired at once the art shows each missile is in a its own casing.

(The fluff mentions called shots to the boom gun, but that action is no longer possible in RUE)

[13eowulf]

As I understand it was suppose to have 10 mini missiles but they where left out and never added to a reprint. I think the FaQ in the cutting room floor has a errata for them being added. If I recall they can all be fired at once the art shows each missile is in a its own casing.

(The fluff mentions called shots to the boom gun, but that action is no longer possible in RUE)

The only CWC Errata on the cutting room floor is here, nothing about the missiles.
Are you sure that the missiles were supposed to be added instead of the fluff removed (possible copy/paste error)?

EDIT: Apparently it is in the official FAQs here, question #5. To answer the OP then, given that these are individual tubes I would allow a volley of any number from one to ten (or however many remain after some are fired off)

[Blue_Lion]

As I understand it was suppose to have 10 mini missiles but they where left out and never added to a reprint. I think the FaQ in the cutting room floor has a errata for them being added. If I recall they can all be fired at once the art shows each missile is in a its own casing.

(The fluff mentions called shots to the boom gun, but that action is no longer possible in RUE)

The only CWC Errata on the cutting room floor is here, nothing about the missiles.
Are you sure that the missiles were supposed to be added instead of the fluff removed (possible copy/paste error)?

EDIT: Apparently it is in the official FAQs here, question #5. To answer the OP then, given that these are individual tubes I would allow a volley of any number from one to ten (or however many remain after some are fired off)

That is why I said it was in the FaQ. I specified the cutting room floor to direct him to the official faq and not the forum called FaQ.

[Axelmania]

Clarification for OP. World Book 23 Xiticix Invasion pages 138-139:

"single shot or volleys of two, four, five or all ten."

sorry axel the boomgun does NOT have a main body. this was gone over repeatedly in another thread. if you follow the rules as written the minimissiles can ONLY hit the main body of the glitterboy, NOT the boom gun because it is part of the glitter boy.

Carried guns listed in hit locations for bots (like with skelebot railguns) is for convience not because it is part. Mini missiles are 99% unguided anyway so I don't care what the occasional naruni smart minimissile can or can't roll to hit, I care what a missileer can roll to hit.

The tactic refers to out dated rules where only guided missiles hit the main body and mini missiles were the only unguided missile. RUE changed that, all missiles including mini missiles hit the main body.(Means it is not possible by RAW to hit the boom gun) AS was pointed out to you before the boom gun is a hit location of a GB as such the GB has the main body not the boom gun. Vollies use the missile combat rules, they are not burst and they always hit the main body.(Because missiles always hit the main body.)

I care what power armor pilots can hit, what missiles can hit only matters when they roll, like smart missiles. Pilots have their own bonuses, their own attacks per melee, their own rolls, their own rules.

Thanks guys. I have a 1st printing, it talks about 10 minis in the fluff, but not in the description.

CWC also gave MDC for the 10 missile launchers which are clearly visible in the artwork, all.reinforcing the "fluff" which emphasized they were the primary weapon used in anti Glitterboy tactics.

The whole point of the missiles is destroying the boomgun. No amount of fiddling will take that away.

(The fluff mentions called shots to the boom gun, but that action is no longer possible in RUE)

Sure it is, if you have a WP and you are not a missile.

[eliakon]

Lets not start this again people
The argument of if
There is a main body besides the actual main body
Missiles can make called shots
Missiles make their strike rolls or people do
Just result in flames and a locked thread.
This thread is not about any of them, so lets not drag it off topic into an argument on one of those "this will only lead to a lock" topics please?

[Blue_Lion]

His theory was explored found wanting and not worth debating any more.
This thread is basically done as the information on the mini-missles was found. It is not about a flavor text reference or house rules.

[Axelmania]

I answered the initial question about the launch rate, what the launch rates can actually be used for is a natural extension of the conversation.

Single shot or volleys of two are aimed shots per RMB, data which apparently got lost in the shuffle to Ultimate.

Volleys of 4/5/10 are burst shots, and called shots cannot be done with bursts.

To me, this means that it might be advantageous not to target the boom gun, because a volley of 4 to 10 missiles can't be dodged, it has to be shot down, and can't be shot down competently unless the GB carries a supplemental missile lancher for defensive purposes (I think the Triax version has this built into the knees?)

Two armor-piercing mini-missiles per attack is still a decent threat to a Boom Gun though, particularly since it's 4 per turn since "the Coalition Army plans to dispatch the G.B. Killers in pairs" (is this flavor text?)

Coalition War Campaign has 3 references to this thread's topic, on page 110:

Left column, paragraph 3:

To counter the range of the boom gun, the G.B. Killer is armed with 10 plasma mini-missiles

Xiticix Invasion expanded on this, saying plasma or AP, which gives more options. The higher chance of a critical strike and the faster speed (higher penalty to hit) make the new option of AP missiles in the outfit a more attractive option when fighting glitterboys. Especially since Techno-Wizard modified Glitterboys may be modified with Impervious to Fire which... actually I can't remember if it helps against plasma or not.

Left column, paragraph 4:

The standard tactic of the Glitter Boy Killer is to target and destroy the Boom Gun, first with missiles, then with other weapons.

Description of standard military tactics isn't flavor text. Imagine if standard Coalition (or Xiticix) tactics described like this were dismissed as "flavor text". Is the Coalition usage of Blitzkrieg "flavor text"? Is the Xiticix buzzing/dueling/swarming merely "flavor text"?

Dismissing ANYTHING in the books as flavor text is a house rule BlueLion, and it is insulting to the authors and the fans. Taking the approach that anything not a numerical listing is 'flavor text' as if that discredits it would cut out over half of most decent world books.

Right column, M.D.C. by Location:

* Mini-Tube Mini-Missile Launchers (10, shoulders) - 10 each

Like the hands, upper arms, forearm plasma/ion guns, and gun arms, these are -4 to strike so it's pretty tough to snipe them. Unlike some missile launchers it doesn't mention anything about destroying the launcher also igniting the missile if it isn't empty, so I wonder if there is some kind of protection against this... the missile-launching APC in Rifts Mercs apparently doesn't have that kind of protection.

There is a main body besides the actual main body

You mean whether guns are separate bodies from their wielders?

Missiles can make called shots

I don't know of a way to program a WP skill into a missile AI, and it sounds prohibitively expensive.

Missiles make their strike rolls or people do

Smart missiles clearly are distinct entities with their own APM and rolls, no grounds exist for extending a person's training bonuses to smart missile AI attacks.

Just result in flames

Not if we avoid flaming and keep to discussing the books, not doing personal attacks.

[Blue_Lion]

I would point out that you are depending on a obsolete book in your attempt to necro and old debatge.
The book called Rifts RPG can not be used to over ride rules published in RUE in currant cannon. So all refences from it are irrevant.

By the currant rules no missile can not hit a GB boom gun.

There is no support in currant rules for your claim that missile combat rules only apply to guided missiles.

Guns that are held are considered part of a larger target that has been pointed out but you try some word game to ignore that fact.

The boom gun mounted on the GB is part of the GB and does not have a separate main body.(No evidence or rules support your theory to the conatary.)

This all has been covered before there is no reason to rehash it hear just because the original question has been covered.

[Axelmania]

I'm primarily depending on Coalition War Campaign, which isn't obsolete. Ultimate doesn't explicitly restrict missileers, only missiles, so there is room to interpret that PA/bot pilots are able to direct them to other locations. Smart Bombs may make their own strikes, but unguided missiles do not make their own strikes.

Boom Guns can operate on their own, any weapon capable of doing that is a distinct entity only listed in MDC by location tables for convenience, like we see for Skelebots.

[RockJock]

Thanks for the reference. I hadn't thought to look in the bug book.

[Blue_Lion]

No most of the points you presented where based off the out dated rules being the ones used as many of your points adressed this.

The flavor text in question is in reference to rules as they where when the book was written, they do not over ride a change to the rules made after the book was written.

Any gun can be operated on its own. The towed howitzer does not mean the gun of a Paladin is not part of the paladin(self propelled artillery).

Your logic is like saying well I can use a helmet without body armor so the helmet is not part of the armor and be targeted by every body when worn with armor without doing a called shot. (It is logic that undermines the whole concept of called shots.)
It leads to-
Well I can use a tire without a car so I do not need called shot to hit a tire as it has its own main body.
Well I can use your head when it not attached as a dodge ball so your head is its own entity and does not need a called shot as it has its own main body.

The CS war campaign does seam to indicate your theory about the Boom gun having its own main body by default is incorrect.(see page 158 fire storm mobile base)
They list multiple main body and main body subsections. Not only that but the command center has a its own main body and still requires a called shot to hit with a -3.
Basically they telling you it has more than 1 main body and one of the main bodies still requires a called shot to hit.(so your theory that the listed parts of something can count as a separate thing when they are not listed as having a main body does appear to book support.)

[Axelmania]

Thanks for the reference. I hadn't thought to look in the bug book.

I can't remember how I knew it was there, either a random discover or maybe someone else pointed it out a while ago. It would be ideal if Palladium included that in the next CWC reprint.

No most of the points you presented where based off the out dated rules being the ones used as many of your points adressed this.

The central point is that World Book 11 dicates "the standard tactic of the Glitter Boy Killer is to target and destroy the Boom Gun, first with missiles"

TSTOTGBKITTADTBGFWM is the primary basis for concluding you can "target the boom gun with missiles" (TTBGWM) because this is exactly what page 110 says the power armor is capable of.

The flavor text in question is in reference to rules as they where when the book was written, they do not over ride a change to the rules made after the book was written.

Please stop house-ruling text you want to try and invalidate as "flavor". It is all canon and all written by Kevin Siembieda.

Any gun can be operated on its own. The towed howitzer does not mean the gun of a Paladin is not part of the paladin(self propelled artillery).

this seems more solidly attached to the vehicle than the boom gun.

Your logic is like saying well I can use a helmet without body armor so the helmet is not part of the armor and be targeted by every body when worn with armor without doing a called shot. (It is logic that undermines the whole concept of called shots.)

Heads are part of the bodies of helmet-wearers, helmets occupy the head area. Helmets are small enough to need called shots to hit whether or not they're worn. Boom Guns are giant guns bigger than people.

It leads to-
Well I can use a tire without a car so I do not need called shot to hit a tire as it has its own main body.

Tires are usually small and prone to requiring called shots anyway.

The CS war campaign does seam to indicate your theory about the Boom gun having its own main body by default is incorrect.(see page 158 fire storm mobile base)

They list multiple main body and main body subsections. Not only that but the command center has a its own main body and still requires a called shot to hit with a -3.

Basically they telling you it has more than 1 main body and one of the main bodies still requires a called shot to hit.(so your theory that the listed parts of something can count as a separate thing when they are not listed as having a main body does appear to book support.)

Distinguishing main bodies is only necessary when it is unclear and looks like 1 big object, not the case with humanoids holding rifles.

[guardiandashi]

Distinguishing main bodies is only necessary when it is unclear and looks like 1 big object, not the case with humanoids holding rifles.

It ONLY counts as having a "main body" when it is indicated as such in the writeup or when it is totally separate. see glitterboy, or well ANY vehicle or power armor the "main body" is always called out anything not specifically noted as "main body" requires a called shot to target.

Yes a glitterboy boomgun lying on the ground by itself would NOT require a called shot to hit. mounted on the glitterboy? it absolutely does.

this is the standard palladium combat convention.

as for as the targeting the boom gun CWC was written under RMB combat rules where ALL mini missiles were considered unguided, unless specifically noted otherwise. Short range missiles and above were considered guided, and had a +3 to strike (unless they were smartbombs, which have a +5 to strike, and can dodge.

RUE changed missile combat and invalidated that tactic because mini-missiles now fall under the "missiles always strike the main body" clause so the "tactic" as described in CWC DOESN'T WORK UNDER THE CURRENT RULESET!!

now I admit I disagree with the change personally and may houserule to use the RMB version if I run a game, but by RAW you can't do the tactic described.

[HWalsh]

The flavor text in question is in reference to rules as they where when the book was written, they do not over ride a change to the rules made after the book was written.

Please stop house-ruling text you want to try and invalidate as "flavor". It is all canon and all written by Kevin Siembieda.

No. It isn't. Under RMB this tactic was valid, since the introduction of RUE it is not.

There is plenty of flavor text in Rifts, and you are quite fond of dismissing it whenever it works against you, so that isn't going to fly.

In this case no. You cannot target a boom gun with missiles since RUE so this tactic is not valid.

Maybe this is why even the Coalition admits that the GB Killer isn't good at killing GBs.

[Blue_Lion]

You need to relies that the rules changed after the book was originally written.

I call the text flavor text because it is describing something not listing rules mechanics.(You have yourself tried to get cannon offical ignored that did not support your view.) I did not say it was invalid because it was flavor text I said it was not valid in currant rules because it is a direct reference to how the rules use to work and not how they currently work. The rule was changed after the book was written so while correct by rules at the time is not correct by currant rules.

I was pointing out the flaw if you can use it when it is not attached part of your augment. And you counter with wild claims.

Shooting a helmet on the ground does not require a called shot, a helmet is not listed as being small and hard to shoot as the rule in rifts. (you do not get to make your own rules to use to defend your unsuported stance.)

Tires are not typically listed with a *making them hard to hit. (In rue none of the tired vehicles had that designation for their tires, a defense not supported by the rules can not be used to affect the rules.)

AS was pointed out to you in the past the GMG said that things on or held by a person require a called shot to hit. So shooting the gun in the hands of a CS grunt requires a called shot. But shooting a gun on the ground does not. (Kind of irrelevant because the gun in question is listed as part of the GB and physically attached to it. Your straw man defense is based on a invalid premise to begin with.)

[Axelmania]

Everyone please note RUE p 261 "See Rifts World Book 11: Coalition War Campaign for the latest innovations in weapons, power armor, robots, and combat vehicles"

Ultimate explicitly instructs people to consult CWC, so everything there is still 100% canon, including the ability of Glitter Boy Killers to destroy boom guns with plasma mini-missiles.

If anyone wants to house rule that missiles can't normally do that, you should still allow the GBK to as an exception to your house rule, because the GBK is a "latest innovation" power armor, and you could treat that as a special feature, since the text explicitly says it can do this.

It ONLY counts as having a "main body" when it is indicated as such in the writeup or when it is totally separate. see glitterboy, or well ANY vehicle or power armor the "main body" is always called out anything not specifically noted as "main body" requires a called shot to target.

I don't agree with this. There is such a thing as an implied main body. Main bodies do not have to be explicit.

Not every single piece of body armor specifies a 'main body', for example, and a lot of creatures simply have MDC rather than main body MDC and MDC for other parts.

Basically, if you are a distinct thing, and you only have 1 amount of MDC, that is the main body.

Yes a glitterboy boomgun lying on the ground by itself would NOT require a called shot to hit. mounted on the glitterboy? it absolutely does.

The issue isn't so much whether or not it takes a called shot (since there's no indication you can't make called shots with mini-missiles, I think KC pointed out the idea of making called shots to hit people behind cover) but whether or not it qualifies as a distinct body.

Distinct bodies sometimes do require called shots when affixed to something larger, even if they are bodies large enough to hit on their own. A good example of this is RUE 254, hitting a pilot riding a Coalition Sky Cycle, requiring a called shot at -3 because "The pilot is shielded and a small and difficult target to hit"

Even though the pilot is noted under MDC by Location, that doesn't mean I can't fire a mini-missile directly at the pilot, even though I would need a called shot to do so. The pilot is still a distinct body, just like the boom gun.

RUE 255 gives another good example: the pitiful 5 M.D.C. of the CV-213 laser rifle (that seems a tad low, I'm wondering if author meant that to be 50 MDC) of the skelebot. The laser rifle is not actually PART of the skelebot. It is simply a weapon that it uses.

Even though there is a special connection in the handle for the skelebot to link to the weapon and power it, that doesn't actually make the gun part of it. 2 connected bodies are still 2 bodies. The same applies to the Glitter Boy. The boom gun is a massive handheld cannon which explicitly can be targeted by the mini-missiles of the GBK and removed and used on its own.

as for as the targeting the boom gun CWC was written under RMB combat rules where ALL mini missiles were considered unguided, unless specifically noted otherwise. Short range missiles and above were considered guided, and had a +3 to strike (unless they were smartbombs, which have a +5 to strike, and can dodge.

RUE changed missile combat and invalidated that tactic because mini-missiles now fall under the "missiles always strike the main body" clause so the "tactic" as described in CWC DOESN'T WORK UNDER THE CURRENT RULESET!!

now I admit I disagree with the change personally and may houserule to use the RMB version if I run a game, but by RAW you can't do the tactic described.

Rules as written, you are ignoring that no language has been introduced limiting the ability of power armor pilots to target whatever they want.

Shuffled sentences resulting in MISSILES being unable to strike what they want is perfectly fine : missiles don't do much thinking, they don't want anything except to hit the center of mass they're directed at.

Even then: implied main bodies exist. A dragon's MDC for example. Or a distinct object. If it's something you wear like a helmet, yeah, that effectively merges with the main body of your armor, but guns don't do that, guns are held, not worn. They do not streamline with the body.

No. It isn't. Under RMB this tactic was valid, since the introduction of RUE it is not.

If some people's house interpretation of RUE lead them to think missiles can't normally do this, GBK mini-missiles must remain an exception since CWC explicitly states it.

There is plenty of flavor text in Rifts, and you are quite fond of dismissing it whenever it works against you, so that isn't going to fly.

This is not flavor text...
target and destroy the Boom Gun, first with missiles
TADTBGFWM is explicitly the standard tactic of Glitter Boy Killer pilots.

This is very direct and unambiguous, in contrast to whatever other text you are referring to.

As for what I am "fond" of, I'll get back to this in my reply to BlueLion below.

In this case no. You cannot target a boom gun with missiles since RUE so this tactic is not valid.

RUE doesn't say anything about being unable to target boom guns with missiles, it says to consult CWC, which says GBKs can.

Maybe this is why even the Coalition admits that the GB Killer isn't good at killing GBs.

I would think that would be more due to the obvious problem of the Boom Gun having 11,000 foot range and mini-missiles having a 5,280 range.

You need to relies that the rules changed after the book was originally written.

Text got shuffled around, so now instead of only smart missiles, it applies to any missiles which strike.

Restrictions on how missiles strike obviously only apply when a missile is doing the striking, when the missile is controlling its path.

When a power armor pilot is directing a missile's path instead of the missiles on-board AI, statements about what missiles can or can't hit mean bupkiss.

I call the text flavor text because it is describing something not listing rules mechanics.

It is a rules mechanic: mini-missiles fired by Glitter Boy Killer power armor can destroy boom guns. This is an unavoidable truth which has never been retconned. RUE261 directs us to consult CWC, CWC remains 100% canon.

(You have yourself tried to get cannon offical ignored that did not support your view.)

HWalsh alluded to this earlier, and I find it an interesting distraction tactic being engaged in. Both of you are being very vague about what you're referring to. If either of you want to start a thread or PM me explaining what 2 canons are being compared, that's fine, but please don't keep trying to derail the thread with personal attacks.

If this is about equating 'back in a body bag' insinuations to clear language about standard power armor tactics, then this is disingenuous. If either of you are referring to some other kind of "flavor text" (HWalsh's wording) or "cannon official" (Blue_Lion's wording) then I need specifics to address the accusation.

If it is the body bag thing you're hinting at, I don't ignore that: I am 100% certain that the Coalition did send Tolkeen's diplomat back in a body bag, as the text states. Our disagreements in that topic were about what the text didn't directly state.

I did not say it was invalid because it was flavor text I said it was not valid in currant rules because it is a direct reference to how the rules use to work and not how they currently work. The rule was changed after the book was written so while correct by rules at the time is not correct by currant rules.

No rules were changed saying that power armor pilots can only strike the main body when using missiles.

Interpretations that extend the limitations on missiles' striking to pilots' striking are obviously wrong, since they contradict the canon.

"All missiles always strike the main body" is describing what missile AI tries to target. Limitations on what missiles can attempt do not limit when they are inert and directed by power armor pilots.

Shooting a helmet on the ground does not require a called shot, a helmet is not listed as being small and hard to shoot as the rule in rifts. (you do not get to make your own rules to use to defend your unsuported stance.)

Which objects qualify as 'small' is a GM call. RUE 361's right column Quick Reference "enables the character to get a bead on very small or difficult specific targets .. (possible penalties for small targets)"

This is grounds for GMs to require a called shot for any small target. This is consistent with the Game Master Guide (which RUE pg 261 says to look at, reinforcing that it is still canon) which mentions on page 32 (left column, question 2) that hitting small objects may require a called shot.

Tires are not typically listed with a *making them hard to hit. (In rue none of the tired vehicles had that designation for their tires, a defense not supported by the rules can not be used to affect the rules.)

True, even on page 266 the 6 foot long Highwayman motorcycle doesn't say it.

Although... the Sky Cycle on 253 doesn't actually list the MDC for the wheels, so those could arguably be the hardest-to-hit wheels of all.

AS was pointed out to you in the past the GMG said that things on or held by a person require a called shot to hit. So shooting the gun in the hands of a CS grunt requires a called shot. But shooting a gun on the ground does not. (Kind of irrelevant because the gun in question is listed as part of the GB and physically attached to it. Your straw man defense is based on a invalid premise to begin with.)

Guns can still require called shots to hit if they're judged to be small by the GM, that's a call GMs can make in many situations. But yeah there's no obligated penalty to hit guns, but it is suggested for any small objects.

Physically attachment doesn't make 2 bodies into 1 body. There is no rule stating there can only be 1 main body when several objects are attached together.

CWC p 159 is a great example of this, as others have pointed out (the Fire Storm) and so too is the pilot being listed under MDC by Location for the Sky Cycle, or the Laser Rifle being listed for the Skelebot, or the Boom gun being listed for the Glitter Boy.

These are all examples of distinct bodies, which can function on their own, yet which can physically attach together with other bodies and move in unison and symbiosis.

That does not in any way necessitate that they are forced to merge into 1 body.

[HWalsh]

Axel, nice try but, nope. Not letting you circumvent the rules.

As you said, RUE says:

"See Rifts World Book 11: Coalition War Campaign for the latest innovations in weapons, power armor, robots, and combat vehicles"

Shooting the boom gun is not an innovation in a weapon, power armor, robot, or combat vehicle. You are IMPLYING that this line includes a tactic. It does not. Shooting the weapon is not an innovation in the vehicle. As it doesn't say, "A new feature of this missile is it can..." or anything to that effect. So nope. Not canon anymore.

It was canon at the time as it was a legal tactic at the time it no longer is. That tactic's viability had nothing to do with CWC, it was built of RMB which is no longer canon.

[Axelmania]

There's no rule being circumvented, no rule exists saying power armor pilots always strike the main body with missiles. What missiles always strike on their own doesn't matter to the GBK.

Even for smart missiles, which always hit the main body, I view handheld rifles as distinct bodies. They may require called shots to hit when wielded by a person, but they are not part of a unified body, so their MDC is a distinct body.

The problem with smart missiles though, is they need supplemental AI to get a WP skill to make a called shot. This would probably be only worth investing in for LRMs.

[HWalsh]

There's no rule being circumvented, no rule exists saying power armor pilots always strike the main body with missiles. What missiles always strike on their own doesn't matter to the GBK.

Even for smart missiles, which always hit the main body, I view handheld rifles as distinct bodies. They may require called shots to hit when wielded by a person, but they are not part of a unified body, so their MDC is a distinct body.

The problem with smart missiles though, is they need supplemental AI to get a WP skill to make a called shot. This would probably be only worth investing in for LRMs.

RUE says missiles always hit the main body. It doesn't distinguish between, or even mention, guided missiles.

[Colonel_Tetsuya]

RUE says missiles always hit the main body. It doesn't distinguish between, or even mention, guided missiles.

Thats why i cant understand why this argument goes on for dozens of pages every time it gets brought up (before that thread is locked).

This isn't vague.

Rule is, missiles hit the main body. Period.

It does not list exceptions, variants, or mention that any type of missile is exempt.

Are mini-missiles missiles? If answer is yes, they hit the main body. Period.

There's no discussion to be had.

(Now, as it happens, i feel that this is a bad rule, but it IS the rule).

[Axelmania]

Mini-missiles are objects acted upon by Glitter Boy Killers. GBKs do the hitting.

Larger "smart missiles " are self-guided subjects which act upon themselves. They do the hitting.

Only in the latter case does a question about what they choose to hit matter.

[Killer Cyborg]

Mini-missiles are objects acted upon by Glitter Boy Killers. GBKs do the hitting.

Larger "smart missiles " are self-guided subjects which act upon themselves. They do the hitting.

Only in the latter case does a question about what they choose to hit matter.

Not all guided missiles in Rifts are smart missiles, IIRC.

[HWalsh]

Mini-missiles are objects acted upon by Glitter Boy Killers. GBKs do the hitting.

Larger "smart missiles " are self-guided subjects which act upon themselves. They do the hitting.

Only in the latter case does a question about what they choose to hit matter.

That does NOT matter Axel, stop please trying to treat your house rules regarding called shots and missiles as though they are official rules.

RUE pg. 362

The last line of Missile Combat on the right hand side of the page reads:

Note: All missiles always strike the main body.

Not "All guided missiles" not "All mini-missiles" not "all missiles fired as un-aimed shots" it just says "All missiles" which includes all missiles used by the GBK.

You can house rule, for your table, however you want, but the official rule is ALL MISSILES ALWAYS STRIKE THE MAIN BODY.

[Blue_Lion]

Mini-missiles are objects acted upon by Glitter Boy Killers. GBKs do the hitting.

Larger "smart missiles " are self-guided subjects which act upon themselves. They do the hitting.

Only in the latter case does a question about what they choose to hit matter.

You are in direct contradiction to the rules with that statement.

Missile combat says all missiles always strike the main body. It does not say all self guided missiles but all missiles that includes dumb fire and mini missiles. That includes dumb missiles.

The book literally says it matters for all missiles, what you are presenting is a direct contradiction to what the book says.

Quite presenting house rules as official. (Your hose rule about missile combat rules not applying to all missiles unless told otherwise is not official and illogical.)

[Blue_Lion]

Mini-missiles are objects acted upon by Glitter Boy Killers. GBKs do the hitting.

Larger "smart missiles " are self-guided subjects which act upon themselves. They do the hitting.

Only in the latter case does a question about what they choose to hit matter.

Not all guided missiles in Rifts are smart missiles, IIRC.

Before RUE all non mini missiles where treated as guided unless told otherwise. RUE changed it so only certain missiles are guided however the missile combat rules still apply to unguided missiles and even directly talks about them.

His whole theory is based of his assumption that the missile combat rules do not apply to unguided missiles. However given that the rules that he says do not apply talk about unguided missiles, and nothing says they do not apply his theory is unsupported. (I find the logic flawed munching attempt to improve mini missiles.)

[Axelmania]

For the 'main bodies must always be called that' crowd, missiles can shoot other missiles, yet the MDC of missiles isn't called "main body".

When an object like a missile or a gun only has one MDC pool they don't call it a main body. This is only done when there are secondary hit locations.

Objects sometimes have their MDC listed alongside something else without actually becoming part of another body. Pilots, missiles, guns, combined vehicles, for example.

Mini-missiles are objects acted upon by Glitter Boy Killers. GBKs do the hitting.

Larger "smart missiles " are self-guided subjects which act upon themselves. They do the hitting.

Only in the latter case does a question about what they choose to hit matter.

That does NOT matter Axel, stop please trying to treat your house rules regarding called shots and missiles as though they are official rules.

RUE pg. 362

The last line of Missile Combat on the right hand side of the page reads:

Note: All missiles always strike the main body.

Not "All guided missiles" not "All mini-missiles" not "all missiles fired as un-aimed shots" it just says "All missiles" which includes all missiles used by the GBK.

You can house rule, for your table, however you want, but the official rule is ALL MISSILES ALWAYS STRIKE THE MAIN BODY.

This applies only when missiles spend an action to make a strike.

It does not apply when the GBK pilot spends an action to make a strike. She is not a missile.

You are in direct contradiction to the rules with that statement.

Missile combat says all missiles always strike the main body. It does not say all self guided missiles but all missiles that includes dumb fire and mini missiles. That includes dumb missiles.

The book literally says it matters for all missiles, what you are presenting is a direct contradiction to what the book says.

Quite presenting house rules as official. (Your hose rule about missile combat rules not applying to all missiles unless told otherwise is not official and illogical.)

It is a rule that the standard tactic of GBKs is to destroy the boom gun with mini missiles. Anyone who is misinterpreting text to conclude otherwise is directly contradicting the text.

Applying a sentence about missiles' target choice to PA pilots is a house rule.

Before RUE all non mini missiles where treated as guided unless told otherwise. RUE changed it so only certain missiles are guided however the missile combat rules still apply to unguided missiles and even directly talks about them.

His whole theory is based of his assumption that the missile combat rules do not apply to unguided missiles. However given that the rules that he says do not apply talk about unguided missiles, and nothing says they do not apply his theory is unsupported. (I find the logic flawed munching attempt to improve mini missiles.)

Missile combat rules certainly do discuss unguided missiles. But statements only apply to missiles in proper context. A missile has to be a hitter to have a statement about what it hits apply.

Unguided missiles aren't hitters. They are unwavering projectiles launches by a launcher. The GBK pilot is the hitter. She doesn't always hit the main body. She primarily hits the boom gun.

Nothing is being improved here. The ability of the GBK to destroy boom guns with its mini-missiles is 100% canon rules, per CWC. This has never been changed, the book has never been discredited.

Misinterpreting text to invent house rules to stop this from happening appears to be an attempt to nerf mini-missiles.

[Blue_Lion]

A missile can shoot another missile when it is not attached because the missile is the largest body or center of mass. However when the missile is attached on a wing mount it can not be shot by a missile as it is not the largest part or main body of the vehicle.

What you did just amounted to saying missile can shoot a helmet on the ground so they can hit a helmet on person. that we know is explicitly against the text in the rules.

Straw man rejected.

The book does not state that the rule only applies when the missile spends the action to make a strike but says all missiles. The rules in question are to cover all missile combat both guided and unguided nothing in the rules says they do not apply to unguided missiles.

On the text in CWC as we have repeatedly told you it is reference to the old rules that allowed for such actions. However in RUE the rules for missile combat where rewritten moving the only strikes main body from guided missiles to all missiles. We are not in conflict with the text but what you are doing is using flavor text that was written in support of rule that has been changed. As the text in question is in conflict with the changed rules, it is an outdated rule and not valid for changing the change that was made after it. (So the one in conflict with currant rules is you not us.)


Let me see if I understand you on the last part. A statement that says all missiles does not mean all missiles but only missiles that are attackers and we know this without the book saying so? That makes no sense it is illogically to assume all has a unstated limit to it. In common speach for all to have a limit to it the limit must be stated. -It is like saying that if you are told all cars must always be parked when not in use, that it only applies to self driving cars. (Unless you have a quote from RUE that says missile combat rules only apply to guided missiles it applies to all missiles by default. The opening statement of Missile combat sets a tone that it is covering talking about all missiles I see nothing that says it only applies when the missile is guided.)

Your head canon does not change the meaning of the rules. You need to quit presenting this illogical idea as how things work, quit simply there is no support for it and dragging this debate up again when it is not part of what the topic asked for does seam you are using this to troll.

[ShadowLogan]

NOT that I want to get involved in this tangent but...

Single shot or volleys of two are aimed shots per RMB, data which apparently got lost in the shuffle to Ultimate.

While the specific wording has changed between RMB and RUE, the end result has not.

Mini-Missiles in RUE are mentioned on pg364 (Missile Strikes) and pg365 (Mini-Missiles) with the skill WP Heavy MD Weapons bonus being applicable, and even the skill description on pg361 mentions mini-missile launchers (new since RMB IINM). RUE on pg360 does state "Character with a Modern W.P can make Aimed and 'Called Shots' (aimed at a specific location within a larger target, such as shooting a gun out of an opponent's hands, shooting the hand, shooting an antenna, or tire, or whatever)."

[13eowulf]

The way I see it some parties are attempting to indulge in word play that is actually incorrect.
Missiles always strike the main body. This is black and white printed. One party here is trying to say that it is, in this case, the pilot doing the hitting/striking and the above black and white printed material only applies to smart or guided missiles.
That is incorrect.
Thing is, if you are gonna try and nitpick to that degree, you have to keep in mind that firing/shooting are not the same as hitting/striking.
The pilot can say they are shooting/aiming the missile at the boomgun, or a leg, or the right eye, or left nut of his or her target all they want. By the written rule that missile will strike the main body. Guided or not, it does not discriminate regarding who fired or aimed the missile, just that the end result will be a main body strike.
Flavour or fluff before or after that by a writer or creative GM in session may paint a different picture, but that is all it Is, flavour or fluff, it changes not the current canon mechanic.

[Killer Cyborg]

Mini-missiles are objects acted upon by Glitter Boy Killers. GBKs do the hitting.

Larger "smart missiles " are self-guided subjects which act upon themselves. They do the hitting.

Only in the latter case does a question about what they choose to hit matter.

Not all guided missiles in Rifts are smart missiles, IIRC.

Before RUE all non mini missiles where treated as guided unless told otherwise. RUE changed it so only certain missiles are guided however the missile combat rules still apply to unguided missiles and even directly talks about them.

His whole theory is based of his assumption that the missile combat rules do not apply to unguided missiles. However given that the rules that he says do not apply talk about unguided missiles, and nothing says they do not apply his theory is unsupported. (I find the logic flawed munching attempt to improve mini missiles.)

Correct.
His comment was phrased in such a way that he addresses his idea that Smart Missiles do the hitting in their own right, whereas unguided missiles don't do the hitting--the pilot does.
That leaves Guided Missiles unaddressed by his theory, and I'm curious where he considers them to fall withing his idea: do guided missiles (which are +3 to strike) do their own hitting, or is it only Smart Missiles (which can have multiple attacks and dodges independent of the operator) that do their own hitting?

[Killer Cyborg]

For the 'main bodies must always be called that' crowd, missiles can shoot other missiles, yet the MDC of missiles isn't called "main body".

It doesn't have to be.
RUE 362
The "main body" of vehicles and creatures is typically the largest area of body mass offered by the target.

The main body of a missile is the body/shaft of the missile itself.
You'd need a Called Shot to hit a fin or the engine specifically.

[Killer Cyborg]

NOT that I want to get involved in this tangent but...

Single shot or volleys of two are aimed shots per RMB, data which apparently got lost in the shuffle to Ultimate.

While the specific wording has changed between RMB and RUE, the end result has not.

Mini-Missiles in RUE are mentioned on pg364 (Missile Strikes) and pg365 (Mini-Missiles) with the skill WP Heavy MD Weapons bonus being applicable, and even the skill description on pg361 mentions mini-missile launchers (new since RMB IINM). RUE on pg360 does state "Character with a Modern W.P can make Aimed and 'Called Shots' (aimed at a specific location within a larger target, such as shooting a gun out of an opponent's hands, shooting the hand, shooting an antenna, or tire, or whatever)."

Having a Weapon Proficiency is a necessary criterion for making a Called Shot, but not a sufficient criterion.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Necessity_and_sufficiency

[Zer0 Kay]

For the 'main bodies must always be called that' crowd, missiles can shoot other missiles, yet the MDC of missiles isn't called "main body".

It doesn't have to be.
RUE 362
The "main body" of vehicles and creatures is typically the largest area of body mass offered by the target.

The main body of a missile is the body/shaft of the missile itself.
You'd need a Called Shot to hit a fin or the engine specifically.

@ KC Plus fins and engines aren't stated out.
@ Axe A missile in a volley is an individual so it doesn't have to be called it isn't directly connected to the other missiles and no a network connection or preprogrammed flight path or networked so or super give mind entity doesn't make them all one body for the purposes of targeting.

[Axelmania]

The way I see it some parties are attempting to indulge in word play that is actually incorrect.
Missiles always strike the main body. This is black and white printed. One party here is trying to say that it is, in this case, the pilot doing the hitting/striking and the above black and white printed material only applies to smart or guided missiles.
That is incorrect.
Thing is, if you are gonna try and nitpick to that degree, you have to keep in mind that firing/shooting are not the same as hitting/striking.
The pilot can say they are shooting/aiming the missile at the boomgun, or a leg, or the right eye, or left nut of his or her target all they want. By the written rule that missile will strike the main body. Guided or not, it does not discriminate regarding who fired or aimed the missile, just that the end result will be a main body strike.
Flavour or fluff before or after that by a writer or creative GM in session may paint a different picture, but that is all it Is, flavour or fluff, it changes not the current canon mechanic.

It must be talking about intent, not the end result. We have many known outcomes for missiles other than hitting main bodies, even ignoring the known capacity of GBK mini missile rockets to destroy the boom gun...

1) rolled too low, you missed, hit nothing
2) opponent dodges, hit nothing
3) opponent block sacrifices, hit the arms
4) opponent shoots missile down, hit nothing
5) opponent parries (Targeted Deflection spell) hit nothing

So when discussing striking, it is clearly talking about attempts.

What missiles do applies to self-guided situations.

What they opt to hit does not apply when there is no self. To unguided situations.

There it is the pilot who strikes and aims with the rockets.

This is why the GBK can destroy boom guns with plasma rockets.

Although the armor piercing loadout in Xiticix Invasion seems possibly better.

[Killer Cyborg]

The way I see it some parties are attempting to indulge in word play that is actually incorrect.
Missiles always strike the main body. This is black and white printed. One party here is trying to say that it is, in this case, the pilot doing the hitting/striking and the above black and white printed material only applies to smart or guided missiles.
That is incorrect.
Thing is, if you are gonna try and nitpick to that degree, you have to keep in mind that firing/shooting are not the same as hitting/striking.
The pilot can say they are shooting/aiming the missile at the boomgun, or a leg, or the right eye, or left nut of his or her target all they want. By the written rule that missile will strike the main body. Guided or not, it does not discriminate regarding who fired or aimed the missile, just that the end result will be a main body strike.
Flavour or fluff before or after that by a writer or creative GM in session may paint a different picture, but that is all it Is, flavour or fluff, it changes not the current canon mechanic.

It must be talking about intent, not the end result.

We have many known outcomes for missiles other than hitting main bodies, even ignoring the known capacity of GBK mini missile rockets to destroy the boom gun...

1) rolled too low, you missed, hit nothing
2) opponent dodges, hit nothing
3) opponent block sacrifices, hit the arms
4) opponent shoots missile down, hit nothing
5) opponent parries (Targeted Deflection spell) hit nothing

So when discussing striking, it is clearly talking about attempts.

Incorrect.
It is specifically discussing hits, not attempted hits.
All missiles (that) hit, always hit the main body. Obviously, missiles that do not hit cannot hit the main body are exempt from this, simply do the the nature of the word "hit."
If it was talking about attempts, then it would say "all missiles attempt to strike the main body."

What missiles do applies to self-guided situations.

What they opt to hit does not apply when there is no self. To unguided situations.

Again, are you talking about ALL guided missiles?
Or just Smart Missiles?

[Axelmania]

KC there is no "that", and "hit" certainly can refer to the attempt rather than the success. We see this for combat terms lots.

"Attacker rolls strike" is a step where you make a strike and roll to see how good it is.

A parry/dodge is executed regardless of whether or not it is high enough to succeed. A "successful hit" can still not literally hit if a dodge or parry prevents that.

If "defending by dodging" costing a melee action only applied to dodges that succeeded, rather than all dodges (successful or not) you would be autododging in failures.

The phrase "successful hit" illustrates not all are successful. Unsuccessful hits were ones that rolled too low, for example.

Do you think Paired Weapons "a twin simultaneous strike with both weapons means losing the automatic parry" only applies if the strike is successful? If I miss on a 1 do I retain my auto parry?

When it says "all missiles hit" it is referring to an attempt. An attempt by a missile.

The line in no way addresses attempts by RPA Elite. They are humans, not missiles.

[HWalsh]

When it says "all missiles hit" it is referring to an attempt. An attempt by a missile.

No. No it isn't Axel. Stop inserting your personal canon.

Here it is from the FAQ

-----
28. Missiles and mini-missiles all have a blast radius, and they all hit the main body. If the main body takes a sixty point hit do the other locations (like the head) take the thirty points from the blast area? And what about blow through? A 'boom gun' does 3D6x10 damage, to a suit of dead-boy armour this gives 10 to 130 points of wasted damage.

Answer: For missile combat, we have deliberately kept it simple so the answer is no only the main body takes damage. There is likewise no rules for blow through. If the GM wants to make it more realistic (and more complicated) for his individual campaign, he is free to modify the rules.
-----

Only the main body takes damage.

You can called shot with a missile all you want I guess, if you want to break the rules about all missiles (guided or not) always hitting main body. However even if that did somehow happen they would only damage the main body.

[Killer Cyborg]

KC there is no "that",

There's more "that" than there is "attempt."

and "hit" certainly can refer to the attempt rather than the success. We see this for combat terms lots.

"Attacker rolls strike" is a step where you make a strike and roll to see how good it is.

1. Which book and page are you quoting from?
2. "Hit" only refers to a hit, not an attempted hit.
3. RUE 297
Roll to Strike: The roll of a twenty-sided die to determine whether or not the attacking character hits his opponent.

RUE 347
Strike: Anyone attempting to hit an opponent must roll to strike.

A parry/dodge is executed regardless of whether or not it is high enough to succeed.

Source?
Seriously, I'm looking at the definition of Parry right now, and you're wrong.

Quit just saying stuff. Research before you post. When you post, back up your claims with official material.
Don't just make stuff up.

I'm not replying to the rest of your post, because I'm not reading it.
If anything you had to say is supported by the book, then post the support.

And while you're at it, maybe get around the the unanswered question I've asked you twice now:
Are you talking about ALL guided missiles?
Or just Smart Missiles?

[Axelmania]

When it says "all missiles hit" it is referring to an attempt. An attempt by a missile.

No. No it isn't Axel. Stop inserting your personal canon.

Here it is from the FAQ

-----
28. Missiles and mini-missiles all have a blast radius, and they all hit the main body. If the main body takes a sixty point hit do the other locations (like the head) take the thirty points from the blast area? And what about blow through? A 'boom gun' does 3D6x10 damage, to a suit of dead-boy armour this gives 10 to 130 points of wasted damage.

Answer: For missile combat, we have deliberately kept it simple so the answer is no only the main body takes damage. There is likewise no rules for blow through. If the GM wants to make it more realistic (and more complicated) for his individual campaign, he is free to modify the rules.
-----

Only the main body takes damage.

You can called shot with a missile all you want I guess, if you want to break the rules about all missiles (guided or not) always hitting main body. However even if that did somehow happen they would only damage the main body.

This is simply addressing the portion of the question, saying if the main body is hit, other locations don't take half damage.

You're quoting from http://www.palladiumbooks.com/questions/combat.html which also has:

89. I have a question about called shot, do you need a natural 12 or better or just 12 after bonuses?
Answer: 12 or better after bonuses.

Does anyone know if the 4/8 > 12 for called rule is reprinted anywhere in Ultimate? I can't seem to locate it on 361. It doesn't appear to say 12 isn't required anymore, so if GMG is still canon until contradicted, would it still apply?

30. Does the boxing skill add an attack at all times or just during melee that doesn't involve missile weapons?
Answer: Only during melee weapons combat it does not apply to any form of ranged combat.

This one's also pretty interesting. How often it is applied?

The FAQ is also clearly misrepresenting some things:

83. On page 42 of the Rifts RPG, you state that mini-missiles are not guided. Instead you must use normal W.P. bonuses. You also state that a character may add in his strike bonus from a high P.P. attribute. Is there a W.P. Mini-Missile? And also if you get a bonus to strike from P.P with Mini-Missiles, why wouldn't you get the same bonus to hit with an aimed shot from a gun?
Answer: That is a typo. P.P. bonuses do not apply to mini missiles

PP bonuses applying clearly isn't a "typo". Typos are when you mispell words, not put in an entire sentence and then later decide to change the rules.

KC there is no "that",

There's more "that" than there is "attempt."

Well neither word is there, so we have to go with whatever makes the most sense. The one which doesn't contradict the rule that GBKs can target and destroy boom guns with their plasma rockets makes the most sense.

"Attacker rolls strike" is a step where you make a strike and roll to see how good it is.

1. Which book and page are you quoting from?
3. RUE 297
Roll to Strike: The roll of a twenty-sided die to determine whether or not the attacking character hits his opponent.
[/quote]
I just noticed that "Attacker Rolls Strike" became "Attacker Rolls to Strike" between RMB and Ultimate, good save.

Nevertheless: this shows that historically, 'strike' and its synonym 'hit' have been used to refer to attempts, not just successes.

2. "Hit" only refers to a hit, not an attempted hit.

RUE 347
Strike: Anyone attempting to hit an opponent must roll to strike.

Strike and hit are basically synonyms, I haven't seen them used differently. RUE 340 under Step 3 mentions a "successful strike", so obviously "unsuccessful strike" would be a strike that didn't hit.

Successful strikes/hits also may not make contact if dodge. Hit doesn't automatically mean contact.

There are strikes that strike, and strikes that do not strike. Just as there are hits that hit, and hits that do not hit. As weird as the wording seems, the words are used both as nouns and verbs.

A parry/dodge is executed regardless of whether or not it is high enough to succeed.

Source?
Seriously, I'm looking at the definition of Parry right now, and you're wrong.

Quit just saying stuff. Research before you post. When you post, back up your claims with official material.
Don't just make stuff up.

This is my common understanding of the rules.

Would you care to make a thread saying "parries by untrained people do not use up a melee action if they fail" and see if people agree or disagree?

Defensive maneuvers have a stated cost, isn't it common understanding the cost is paid by the attempt rather than the success?

while you're at it, maybe get around the the unanswered question I've asked you twice now:
Are you talking about ALL guided missiles?
Or just Smart Missiles?

For now I am just talking about smart missiles v unguided missiles. This is the most black and white issue and it seems like deciding on how to treat guided could wait until afterward.

I realize it's a really important issue that would affect just how big an impact this rule would have, but it's gray and would add more things to argue about which ultimately wouldn't matter if we can't even agree on unguided/smart differences.

[Blue_Lion]

KC there is no "that", and "hit" certainly can refer to the attempt rather than the success. We see this for combat terms lots.

"Attacker rolls strike" is a step where you make a strike and roll to see how good it is.

A parry/dodge is executed regardless of whether or not it is high enough to succeed. A "successful hit" can still not literally hit if a dodge or parry prevents that.

If "defending by dodging" costing a melee action only applied to dodges that succeeded, rather than all dodges (successful or not) you would be autododging in failures.

The phrase "successful hit" illustrates not all are successful. Unsuccessful hits were ones that rolled too low, for example.

Do you think Paired Weapons "a twin simultaneous strike with both weapons means losing the automatic parry" only applies if the strike is successful? If I miss on a 1 do I retain my auto parry?

When it says "all missiles hit" it is referring to an attempt. An attempt by a missile.

The line in no way addresses attempts by RPA Elite. They are humans, not missiles.

Hit and strikes may be similar however roll to strike is an attempt to hit a strike is a hit. If the attack misses or is dodged it did not hit. A missed attack would not be a hit, that is not only illogical, but unsupported violation of common English rules.


A unsuccessful hit would be not hitting. The fact I can successfully hit some one does not mean an unsuccessful hit is a hit. A unsuccessful hit is a miss not a hit. Nice attempt at word play distracting defense but no dice, a unsuccessful hit is not a hit but a miss the creators of our spoken words gave it a different name than hit. It is binary a successful hit = hit an unsuccessful hit = miss(and is not a hit).

Oh and by the way the reference to a tactic in a description is not a rule but flavor text as it does define a rule and does not specify the mechanics of how it happens and is directed conflict with currant mechanics, making it irrelevant. It is just an obscure reference in a description not a rule as it has no mechanical value. The fact you can not see that it is a description is on you not the books.

Note:even if it was a stated rule with a mechanical value it would still be irrelevant as it conflicts with the change to the rules presented in RUE. Making it out dated or obsolete and not part of currant rules. Something all your fancy word play never even addressed.

The line says all missiles hit the main body.

That literally means any time a missile makes conteact it is the main body. It applies to all missiles regaurdless of how it is guided so yes it includes missiles shot by RPA elite..

Your unstated circular logic defense that it is limited without being told it is limited, only works if it is true. However there is no support for it, there for it is not RAW or common rules. No evidence has been presented to support all missiles only referring to self guided missiles, there for your logic starts off unsupported or incorrect by the rules as nothing in the circle you use makes it correct it starts of wrong and ends wrong.

We would need to be told some how that all missiles only refers to missiles X or that missile combat rules does not apply to all missiles. What you did is started with the conclusion that they it does not then try to twist the meaing with insane gramatical gyminastics to make it true.

I find the simplest logic is typically correct. lets look at the assumptions.
A. All missiles means all missiles guided and unguided.
B. All missiles means all guided missiles because strike=hit and strike can only be applied to attackers not weapons.

B-is incorrect by the rules of English and requires using an assumption that does not have any stated support.(The books never say that strike can only be used by the attacker just that attacker rolls a strike. But by English rules in long range combat it is the projectile that strikes or misses regardless of who the attacker is.)
A-Assumes the text means what it says and that the word all means all.

Of the two A requires less assumptions and has no inherent need to prove it is true as it is what the text says. B-Requires multiple assumptions to be made for it to be true(that all is only referring to self guided and that strike can only be done by the attacker) and that basic rules of English are suspended in the rules.

Conclusion B is incorrect lacks any stated support and is illogical.

[Axelmania]

Hit and strikes may be similar however roll to strike is an attempt to hit a strike is a hit.

I've seen these terms used interchangeably in Palladium yet have never seen them explicitly defined as different things.

If the attack misses or is dodged it did not hit.

If that is true, and the proposal that hitting/striking must refer to successful attempts, not simply attempts...

then "missiles always hit" mean "missiles never miss" and "missiles are never dodged".

If the natural extension of the interpretation is further conflict, that interpretation should be discarded in favor of something that makes sense.

A missed attack would not be a hit, that is not only illogical, but unsupported violation of common English rules.

Palladium has a history of calling things hits before defense is resolved. N&S example 125 "That makes the total Strike roll a 7, which is a hit." It is called a hit before Kajo's parry is rolled on 126.

I don't know what common English rules you refer to. There are a variety of ways to use the word. For example "If intelligence had been what it should have been, I don't think we'd ever have hit that island." This refers to an attack, but not necessarily a successful one.

In many cases it doesn't refer to actual physical contact with another thing, but simply entering its realm of space... "You'll hit some nasty thunderstorms if you descend too late.  We hit a lot of traffic coming back from the movies."

A unsuccessful hit would be not hitting.

Depends on what you're talking about succeeding at. A pop fly that gets caught isn't successful. There's launching an attack and then there's scoring the desired objective.

"An unsuccessful strike would not be striking" sounds similar to your statement. Yet Palladium does call it a 'strike' even if it doesn't succeed. If a strike can be a miss, then a hit can also be a miss, since strike and hit are synonyms.

The fact I can successfully hit some one does not mean an unsuccessful hit is a hit. A unsuccessful hit is a miss not a hit.

It is both. A failed attempt is still an attempt. The words 'hit' and 'strike' can be used to convey attempts at success rather than actual success.

Nice attempt at word play distracting defense but no dice, a unsuccessful hit is not a hit but a miss the creators of our spoken words gave it a different name than hit. It is binary a successful hit = hit an unsuccessful hit = miss(and is not a hit).

This is not a distraction or wordplay. It is acknowledging that descriptively something is called a 'hit' sometimes even when not successful, proving Palladium's broad usage of the term.

There is no binary, saying something like 'an unsuccessful hit is a miss' doesn't negate the sentence calling it a hit.

If I say "an unsuccessful election is a draw" calling it a draw wouldn't negate it having been an election.

Oh and by the way the reference to a tactic in a description is not a rule but flavor text

It is a rule, it is a direct word-of-god from Siembieda about the reality of Rifts Earth. There is a worrying trend of people calling canon in the books 'flavor text' when they don't like it.

"Flavor text" is "I was going to call this RPG Boomers originally".

as it does define a rule and does not specify the mechanics of how it happens and is directed conflict with currant mechanics, making it irrelevant.

The entire world-building which encompasses most of the books could fit this description. That stuff isn't irrelevant. We talk about it all the time.

It is just an obscure reference in a description

A description of the GBK's primary tactic is not 'obscure'. It is a very well known power armor in a very well known book.

not a rule as it has no mechanical value. The fact you can not see that it is a description is on you not the books.

You are introducing a false dichotomy with your insistent on things 'mechanical', in either case we are looking at sentences written about weapon systems.

Note:even if it was a stated rule with a mechanical value it would still be irrelevant as it conflicts with the change to the rules presented in RUE.

Except it doesn't, because the 'always hit' rule is clearly not talking about contact (or it would outlaw misses/blocks/parries/dodges/shootdowns) and since it is talking about attempts, it is referring to missile attempts and not pilot attempts.

Making it out dated or obsolete and not part of currant rules. Something all your fancy word play never even addressed.

Pre-RUE books are not obsolete.

The line says all missiles hit the main body.
That literally means any time a missile makes conteact it is the main body.

Now who's bending English? There is no "any time", here, "always hit" means "never miss".

You could just as easily say that this means strike rolls are unnecessary if the target is the main body (because you never miss the main body) and that strike rolls are for the purposes of things you don't always hit (other stuff).

It applies to all missiles regaurdless of how it is guided so yes it includes missiles shot by RPA elite..

If the missile isn't hitting, what it always hits doesn't matter.

Your unstated circular logic defense that it is limited without being told it is limited, only works if it is true. However there is no support for it, there for it is not RAW or common rules.

The limit is clear in the text: the missile is the subject. "Hit" is the verb. This is a rule about situations when missiles are subjects.

No evidence has been presented to support all missiles only referring to self guided missiles,

Hitters must have a self. Self-guided missiles have a self.

Unguided missiles do not have a self. Things which do not have a self cannot be subjects in respect to hitting in the way it is being used.

I am well aware you can say "I hit the ball and the ball hit the fence" but it's more correct to say "I hit the ball into the fence". The latter is how this is being used, because it's the only way that makes sense.

If you use it as an incomplete thought that no matter what happens, missiles start making contact with main bodies, it completely ignores all the other combat rules which prevent that.

We would need to be told some how that all missiles only refers to missiles X or that missile combat rules does not apply to all missiles.

You would not. You would just need to know which missiles hit things.

Unguided missiles don't hit things. They're the ball not the batter. You need to perceive combat as a complete thought, with actors and the things they act upon.

What you did is started with the conclusion that they it does not then try to twist the meaing with insane gramatical gyminastics to make it true.

Wrong. I could accuse you of the same disorder, but that wouldn't get us anywhere, so how about we don't engage in mind-reading (mind block up!) and stick to facts instead of interpersonal motive/process speculation?

I find the simplest logic is typically correct. lets look at the assumptions.
A. All missiles means all missiles guided and unguided.
B. All missiles means all guided missiles because strike=hit and strike can only be applied to attackers not weapons.

The problem here is you are breaking it up too much. The issue isn't what falls under 'all missiles', it is "when does a missile hit".

The sentence can't be referring to making contact with a target, because "always hit" would contradict being able to parry/dodge/block/shoot missiles to prevent contact. This interpretation must be discarded.

So since it definitely is not referring to making contact, it is referring to the attempt to make contact.

Since it is referring to attempts, there must be an attemptor. The sentence structure shows us the attempter is the missile.

So the rule doesn't apply when the attempter is not a missile, even if they are attempting VIA a missile.

by English rules in long range combat it is the projectile that strikes or misses regardless of who the attacker is.

Please stop inventing fake "rules" for English. It can be used either way. for example: "Alas, 13 months later, he’d be dead, struck down by Lee Harvey Oswald and a $12.78 rifle."

Doing so just for the projectile and not the projector is an incomplete thought, and since there is nothing to complete the thought, that use is disqualified.

A-Assumes the text means what it says and that the word all means all.

The word 'all' isn't under attack here, you're kicking at the wrong goalposts. It is the context. Your subsequent explanations are being misdirected at something I'm not even criticizing.

"I always eat all the chips at lunch" for example, doesn't have to mean all the chips in the universe, but rather, those supplied to me at lunch time.

[guardiandashi]

Axel since you don't seem to "get it" I will try to explain step by step the issue with your insistence on your view of the glitterboy killers minimissiles and why NO ONE who has posted agrees with you.

back in the day there was the Rifts main book.
under the rules as written there were 4 types of missiles mini-missiles, short range missiles, medium range missiles, and long range missiles.
the mini-missiles were EXPLICITLY unguided, and if fires 1,0r 2 at a time they could be aimed, at specific target locations.

all other missiles were self guided, and if you read carefully, the pilot never actually rolled a strike for the guided missiles, technically the missiles were rolling their own strike rolls, (its why the only to hit bonus they got was their own +3, or +5 to strike. )

various books were published including the coalition war campaign, which mentions a tactic, IE firing the mini-missiles aimed to strike the boom gun, however there are no RULES listed on exactly how one goes about doing so, so the answer is to refer back to the specific rules for firing missiles, and missile combat. IE Rifts main book.

several years later ... the Rifts main book "ultimate edition" was printed. one of the changes was that ALL missiles ALWAYS strike the main body. (period full stop)

so now someone looking at the glitterboy killer and seeing the mention of using the mini missiles to make shots targeting the boom gun and a person who understands RPG precedence and such looks at it and says "hmm that's a good tactic," but then looks at the RUE and the cite from CWC and says "huh" that Doesn't work!"

since there is no Actual rules mechanic described in coalition war campaign, you have to look at the missile combat rules in RUE (current edition core rulebook) which overrides any rules that even partially reference the subject, and since the CWC mention doesn't even give a specific "rule" it is automatically "flavor text" and overridden.

[Axelmania]

Rules-as-written, reality-as-written, whatever you want to call it, it's all RAW, all canon and it's all equally authoritative.

The rules still exist in RUE on how to operate this: you make a called shot.

Called shots over-ride the default status of things hitting the main body.

The unexplained shuffle of the "all missiles always hit" text doesn't say anything about overriding called shot rules. Specific rules always trump generalized ones.

There is no automatic "flavor text", you can simply choose to ignore equally canonical text because you don't understand its mechanics, but that is a house rule.

The text works the same way regardless of whether or not it's conveniently listed next to smart missiles, it was and still is talking about missiles making choices.

Whether 1990 or 2005, it's clear that missiles don't always hit the main body because you've always been able to dodge them, always been able to shoot them down, and always been able to block sacrifice. FoM even added a spell to parry them.

Since 'always hit' isn't talking about literally always hitting, it is instead talking about the target that missiles choose.

When missiles aren't choosing, the text is irrelevant. The pilot chooses. They too are limited to main body unless they have an appropriate WP.

[ShadowLogan]

Axel since you don't seem to "get it" I will try to explain step by step the issue with your insistence on your view of the glitterboy killers minimissiles and why NO ONE who has posted agrees with you.

I agree with him in principle, the rules exists within RAW (BOTH RMB & RUE) to allow for it. So it isn't "NO ONE".

Missiles in general under RMB-era where not subject to specific WP classification (IINM), but Mini-Missile description in RMB had a description that basically worked as a WP since they where not guided, unlike the rest.

Under RUE, missiles in general are now all unguided unless specified (and retroactively to). However Mini-Missiles are now subject to WP bonuses, unlike other missile types. And WP rules allow for additional bonuses to be gained depending on the type of shot being taken as they (WP rules) don't make an exception for not applying to specific weapons that they cover (in this case mini-missiles because regular missiles aren't subject to WP bonuses).

And saying that "missiles always hit the main body" is really redundant, because IINM all attacks hit the Main Body by Default mechanically speaking. And you can't make a called shot per the rules without a WP.