No recoil burst weapons and.strike modifiers

[Axelmania]

From Federation of Magic 112, reprinted on Sedition 57 under "TW Weapon Notes"

Because the TW weapons are generating spells, there is no recoil from firing them.
..
Note that this does not change the fact that a proficient user is only +1 to strike with a burst, but unskilled users will make a straight die roll instead of the usual penalty of -6.

Does anyone think this was.intended to apply retroactively to all TW weapons capable if bursting (for example a JA-9 converted to TW energy) or just the new ones?

If it was all, that could help explain their survival at such high costs, burst accuracy (well, lack of inaccuracy) for those without WP, which could be many mages.

The clarification that bursts hit at +1 even with 0 recoil to throw off aim gives me a new perspective on boom guns too.

Apparently creating energy attacks from e clips in the classic fashion still qualifies as recoil though, even with lasers.

[eliakon]

From Federation of Magic 112, reprinted on Sedition 57 under "TW Weapon Notes"

Because the TW weapons are generating spells, there is no recoil from firing them.
..
Note that this does not change the fact that a proficient user is only +1 to strike with a burst, but unskilled users will make a straight die roll instead of the usual penalty of -6.

Does anyone think this was.intended to apply retroactively to all TW weapons capable if bursting (for example a JA-9 converted to TW energy) or just the new ones?

If it was all, that could help explain their survival at such high costs, burst accuracy (well, lack of inaccuracy) for those without WP, which could be many mages.

In principle the newest rules superceed the older rules.
Since the older rules were now changed it would seem to make all weapons, new and old, follow the same rules
Of course it also requires that the TW weapon be capable of burst firing which is not always a given.

The clarification that bursts hit at +1 even with 0 recoil to throw off aim gives me a new perspective on boom guns too.

Boomguns and your obsession with trying to prove that they fire bursts has nothing to do with TW weapons. Or is this an attempt to start yet another thread on the subject "by accident"?

Apparently creating energy attacks from e clips in the classic fashion still qualifies as recoil though, even with lasers.

The mechanical effect of firing the weapon itself could throw off the aim, who knows. I would have to dig deeper into burst mechanics

Another question of importance is if this rule for TW weapons and their rules for bursts was changed in any other later books or RUE?

[Axelmania]

Anyone know if this section got a reprint in FoM revised post-RUE?

I believe the rule would stand since RUE doesn't explicitly deny it. It would've been useful to reprint it in the TW section though.

The relevance to boomguns is I used to think it was necessary to explain how a single round could cause recoil penalties via front row throwing off back ones. That is clearly not required anymore.

This would also explain how with WP Heavy MD and mini-missiles how a group of missiles could get reduced strike bonuses even if they were fired simultaneously and thus would not impact consecutive missiles with recoil.

[Blue_Lion]

Anyone know if this section got a reprint in FoM revised post-RUE?

I believe the rule would stand since RUE doesn't explicitly deny it. It would've been useful to reprint it in the TW section though.

The relevance to boomguns is I used to think it was necessary to explain how a single round could cause recoil penalties via front row throwing off back ones. That is clearly not required anymore.

This would also explain how with WP Heavy MD and mini-missiles how a group of missiles could get reduced strike bonuses even if they were fired simultaneously and thus would not impact consecutive missiles with recoil.

Ok the last reprint does not count it is the books first printing date used for order of rules. It is the date the book was written not last time it was tossed on a photo copier.(Unless we are told the book is updated, that PB rarely does.)

This rule does not affect any thing other than TW weapons that fire spells it does not have any baring on missiles or boom guns.

[drewkitty ~..~]

Since the combat texts do not directly cover magic ranged weapons and bursts, I would make my own rulings on the subject on case by case determinations based off the concept and abilities of the weapon.

[Axelmania]

[
This rule does not affect any thing other than TW weapons that fire spells it does not have any baring on missiles or boom guns.

You're half right because there are really two rules here. It is saying TW weapons don't produce recoil, and that doesn't apply to anything else.

But then it explains the effects of no recoil.

1) proficient user is only +1 to strike with a burst
2) unskilled users will make a straight die roll instead of the usual penalty of -6.

These are the ramifications of bursts which lack recoil. So plausibly if any other weapons did lack it, the presence of a +1 would not be in conflict with it.

Basically it proves that a +1 bursting bonus is not a declaration that recoil must be present. So anti-recoilers would not have that as an issue of contention.

The issue with missiles is basically this... If you are firing a volley of mini-missiles without WP Heavy MD are you -6 for bursting without a WP or are you +-0 because missiles firing out simultaneously do not produce recoil?

The answer would probably be found in volley size vs number of launchers.

[glitterboy2098]

Anyone know if this section got a reprint in FoM revised post-RUE?

I believe the rule would stand since RUE doesn't explicitly deny it. It would've been useful to reprint it in the TW section though.

The relevance to boomguns is I used to think it was necessary to explain how a single round could cause recoil penalties via front row throwing off back ones. That is clearly not required anymore.

This would also explain how with WP Heavy MD and mini-missiles how a group of missiles could get reduced strike bonuses even if they were fired simultaneously and thus would not impact consecutive missiles with recoil.

Ok the last reprint does not count it is the books first printing date used for order of rules. It is the date the book was written not last time it was tossed on a photo copier.(Unless we are told the book is updated, that PB rarely does.)

This rule does not affect any thing other than TW weapons that fire spells it does not have any baring on missiles or boom guns.

actually given Palladiums tendency toward shadow updates, the print run number and date does have a role. if a rule or stat is changed between printings, you use the version with the most recent printing to determine which is the one to use. but aside from that one narrow application, yeah the print run doesn't matter.

[Blue_Lion]

Anyone know if this section got a reprint in FoM revised post-RUE?

I believe the rule would stand since RUE doesn't explicitly deny it. It would've been useful to reprint it in the TW section though.

The relevance to boomguns is I used to think it was necessary to explain how a single round could cause recoil penalties via front row throwing off back ones. That is clearly not required anymore.

This would also explain how with WP Heavy MD and mini-missiles how a group of missiles could get reduced strike bonuses even if they were fired simultaneously and thus would not impact consecutive missiles with recoil.

Ok the last reprint does not count it is the books first printing date used for order of rules. It is the date the book was written not last time it was tossed on a photo copier.(Unless we are told the book is updated, that PB rarely does.)

This rule does not affect any thing other than TW weapons that fire spells it does not have any baring on missiles or boom guns.

actually given Palladiums tendency toward shadow updates, the print run number and date does have a role. if a rule or stat is changed between printings, you use the version with the most recent printing to determine which is the one to use. but aside from that one narrow application, yeah the print run doesn't matter.

Basically last time a change was written not the last time a book was printed.

[Axelmania]

Which begs the question: what in RUE is actually a 'change' rather than a reshuffled reprint?

[J_cobbers]

The issue with missiles is basically this... If you are firing a volley of mini-missiles without WP Heavy MD are you -6 for bursting without a WP or are you +-0 because missiles firing out simultaneously do not produce recoil?

The answer would probably be found in volley size vs number of launchers.

Recoil isn't an issue that comes up with firing volley's of missiles (mini or other wise) in the rules. Look at RUE page 360, right side of the page near the top under the No W.P. section. An untrained person can fire a modern weapon, but heavy weapons are -5 to strike untrained. Burst fire is only -3 untrained and shooting wild is -6. This isn't a shooting wild situation without more facts, and it's not a burst, it's a volley, so I think the untrained -5 is the correct penalty for your situation. A volley is not a burst, they are different game terms, and defined different combat section. This is important as there are fewer bonuses to strike with missiles, and a volley of 4 or more always strikes on a successful strike unless shot down etc. So if you're attacker in your hypo fires a volley of at least 4 mini-missiles, and rolls a successful strike with the -5 penalty to hit, all 4+ missiles will strike.

Also a related skill to factor in, if the attacker is launching mini-missiles from the weapon system of a vehicle, Robot vehicle, PA or other ground based weapon system rather than a hand held launcher, and has the Weapon System skill which they would need to be able to use the weapons if it isn't a hand held one, then they also get a +1 to strike and it wouldn't be unskilled. Why? Because a weapon system is different than a handheld weapon using the modern WP Heavy MD. I think the character would also need to roll their percentage to be able to operate the weapon system for at least the first time if they've never used it before.

[Axelmania]

Volleys have a history of being described as bursts, even if this is no longer openly affirmed, unless it is blatently contradicted I can still think if them that way. They certainly fit the definition.

It does seem like untrained burst fire is no longer -6, but the mere -3 with a -5 on top of it for heavy is -8 so now its even harder to untrained burst heavy weapons, I like it.

You are right that someone with Weapons Systems wouldn't be unskilled, but I think you would still need a WP to do called shots.

[Alrik Vas]

Lasers have no recoil in the rules, I thought.

TW energy weapons don't count as lasers.

So, I think it's pretty simple.

[eliakon]

Volleys have a history of being described as bursts, even if this is no longer openly affirmed, unless it is blatently contradicted I can still think if them that way. They certainly fit the definition.

Okay, I'm probably going to regret this...
...but I'm morbidly curious now.
Where have missile volleys been described as bursts previously?

[Axelmania]

Lasers have no recoil in the rules, I thought.

TW energy weapons don't count as lasers.

So, I think it's pretty simple.

Although lasers lacking recoil makes sense to me, I don't remember the rules ever saying that. The Conversion Book actually had an example of combat where I believe a laser pistol was being used (every bit of data about it sounded like the C-18) and it struck at +1 for a burst.

But with FoM's note, that could apply to no-recoil weapons too, so it's a bit fuzzy. All this rule really did was erase the penalty for bursting without a WP.

Where have missile volleys been described as bursts previously?

Rifts 40 "Volleys & Bursts" began with applying the same rules to them. Even though the language could make them sound like 2 things ("One volley or one burst") page 42 had "bursts (firing a volley of missiles in any quantity, 3 to 60)" under Mini-Missiles, which sounds like "volleys and bursts" was like "squares and rectangles" in that volleys are a specific kind of burst, a burst using missiles.

RUE 365's section on Mini Missiles is no longer that specific, but it still does direct people to consult the WP Heavy Mega Damage Weapons skill like before, so cutting s strike bonuses in 1/2 for bursts would still apply.

The "simultaneous dual blasts" rule on RUE 361 could except a pair of mini-missiles, and not count them as a burst, allowing aimed or called shots to be done with 1 or 2 mini-missiles, just like before.

It doesn't seem like RUE goes into a huge amount of detail about what a burst is, but it would seem pretty clear that it would apply to 3+ shots.

[Blue_Lion]

Looking at wording of Pg 40 in Rifts.

Tittle- Volleys & bursts
Fallowing text- One volley or one burst counts as one attack, even if a dozen, yes 12 rounds are fired.

*So the rules apear to be written to cover both volleys and bursts while not stating they are the same. So it is not describing them as the same just a set of rules to cover both.

42-was treating mini missiles like a standard weapon not a normal missile. This is also why the rules use to allow for called shots with mini missiles and the flavor text supporting it in CWC.

RUE 365 only says it gets bonuses from WP heavy. Other than that no rules remove it from standard missile combat.

RUE 361 does not specify it applies to mini-missiles. Just that it is a double barrel weapon.

Conclusion- Never have missile volleys been described as bursts in general. Burst and volleys use to use the same general rules. Mini missiles doing burst in the past appears to worded as being outside the norm for missiles.

[Axelmania]

Rifts 42 described a 3 mini missile volley as a burst. Outside the norm as it might be it is still an example of missile an described as bursting.

Rules still allow for called shots with mini missiles if you have the heavy WP. I believe the protest is about whether or not the called shots can be made at things which are not main bodies.

They can, because: always hit != only hit.

[Blue_Lion]

Oh god not the hits every location in the blast radius augment again.

[Axelmania]

Certainly not: you can't hit things completely behind cover. The GM would have to assess what things those would be based on posture, distance, facing, etc. Explosions don't hit people protected by a wall and would not hit an arm protected by a body.

[eliakon]

Wasn't this thread supposed to be about TW weapons and strike modifiers?

Why is it turning into the endless (and routinely locked as circular) debates about AOE damage and called shots with mini-missiles?

[Axelmania]

I began there but didn't include TW in title for a reason.

But getting back to that: wild shots appear to work differently in RUE so I'm nor sure what this would do now.

Originally wild was -6 if no WP or 0 bonuses if you had WP.

New rules seem to apply the -6 to everyone and don't neutralize bonuses.