Caster availability of spells

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

Moderators: Immortals, Supreme Beings, Old Ones

AntyCrist
D-Bee
Posts: 5
Joined: Sun Aug 13, 2017 6:06 pm

Caster availability of spells

Unread post by AntyCrist »

There is this rule:
[quote]Magic takes two days of study per level of spell magic to learn a spell.
The price to purchase a spell for study (provided you can find a seller, something which is not guaranteed) is as follows:
Level 1: 5000 credits, Level 2: 10,000 credits, Level 3: 20,000 credits, Level 4: 30,000 Level 5: 40,000 Level 6: 70,000 Level 7: 90,000 Level 8: 120,000 Level 9: 180,000 Level 10-15: 500,000-1,000,000.[/quote]

It applies to Layline walkers, Shifters, and Techno-wizards and not to Mystics. What about other caster classes? Specifically temporal classes like those in England (WB3)?
User avatar
Mack
Supreme Being
Posts: 6295
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2000 2:01 am
Comment: This space for rent.
Location: Searching the Dinosaur Swamp
Contact:

Re: Caster availability of spells

Unread post by Mack »

If you mean a Temporal Wizard learning a typical Invocation, then yes.

If you mean a Temporal Wizard learning a Temporal spell, then no. Those are more rare and will cost more.
Some gave all.
Love your neighbor.
Know the facts. Know your opinion. Know the difference.
AntyCrist
D-Bee
Posts: 5
Joined: Sun Aug 13, 2017 6:06 pm

Re: Caster availability of spells

Unread post by AntyCrist »

So your saying that a Temporal wizard/warrior can learn conventional spells from a gild like a LW? As opposed to being limited to leveling like a Mystic?
User avatar
drewkitty ~..~
Monk
Posts: 17737
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2000 1:01 am
Location: Eastvale, calif
Contact:

Re: Caster availability of spells

Unread post by drewkitty ~..~ »

First. The 2 days per level of spell for a common magic mage to teach an invocation to another common magic mage. This text works for all 'common magic invocations'.
Temporal magic is just a Very Rare & Very Guarded set of 'common magic invocations'.

LLW, Temp.Wiz/War., TW, Shifters are all 'common magic mages" that can learn/teach spells between each other.
(Examples from Other Settings: Wizards (PF) & Mystic Studies (HU) are also common magic mages.)

Do the price listings apply to getting a Temp.Wiz. to teach you a Temporal spell…? No way Jose.
Temporal magic is guarded in the 'we will kill the blabber and maybe the one blabbed to' sort of way.
May you be blessed with the ability to change course when you are off the mark.
Each question should be give the canon answer 1st, then you can proclaim your house rules.
Reading and writing (literacy) is how people on BBS interact.
User avatar
Library Ogre
Palladium Books® Freelance Writer
Posts: 9801
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2001 1:01 am
Comment: My comments do not necessarily represent the views of Palladium Books.
Location: Texas
Contact:

Re: Caster availability of spells

Unread post by Library Ogre »

AntyCrist wrote:There is this rule:
Magic takes two days of study per level of spell magic to learn a spell.
The price to purchase a spell for study (provided you can find a seller, something which is not guaranteed) is as follows:
Level 1: 5000 credits, Level 2: 10,000 credits, Level 3: 20,000 credits, Level 4: 30,000 Level 5: 40,000 Level 6: 70,000 Level 7: 90,000 Level 8: 120,000 Level 9: 180,000 Level 10-15: 500,000-1,000,000.


It applies to Layline walkers, Shifters, and Techno-wizards and not to Mystics. What about other caster classes? Specifically temporal classes like those in England (WB3)?


As a general rule, yes. However, the price is not guaranteed, simply a rough suggestion. If you want to learn a 5th level spell, and can find someone who will teach it to you, it will PROBABLY cost about 40,000, especially if there's a large enough market to create competition (for example, you could probably find that price on Phase World, where Temporal Magic is relatively available). However, if the only person who you can find to teach it in the entire dimension kind of hates you, the price gets a lot higher.

On that note, I will add that, IME, GMs are parsimonious with new spells, and that tends to cripple casters. If the merc has the opportunity to buy a gun that runs 22k, then the wizard should probably be able to find a spell that runs about the same amount.
-overproduced by Martin Hannett

When I see someone "fisking" these days my first inclination is to think "That person doesn't have much to say, and says it in volume." -John Scalzi
Happiness is a long block list.
If you don't want to be vilified, don't act like a villain.
The Megaverse runs on vibes.
All Palladium Articles
Mutant Dawn for Savage Worlds!
Colonel_Tetsuya
Champion
Posts: 2172
Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2012 3:22 am

Re: Caster availability of spells

Unread post by Colonel_Tetsuya »

AntyCrist wrote:So your saying that a Temporal wizard/warrior can learn conventional spells from a gild like a LW? As opposed to being limited to leveling like a Mystic?


Any spellcaster that is not defined as a Mystic can learn common invocation magic from another spellcaster (or scroll).
Im loving the Foes list; it's the only thing keeping me from tearing out my eyes from the dumb.
Shark_Force
Palladin
Posts: 7128
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 4:11 pm

Re: Caster availability of spells

Unread post by Shark_Force »

Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:
AntyCrist wrote:So your saying that a Temporal wizard/warrior can learn conventional spells from a gild like a LW? As opposed to being limited to leveling like a Mystic?


Any spellcaster that is not defined as a Mystic can learn common invocation magic from another spellcaster (or scroll).


not quite true. there are, for example, warlocks.

that said, every OCC should tell you whether or not they can learn spells from various sources. in older materials, that may be somewhat complicated to tell, however... because it used to be standard to write something to the effect of "has ley line walker abilites 1-9" or similar. except, the RUE ley line walker is not the same as the RMB ley line walker...
User avatar
eliakon
Palladin
Posts: 9093
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 9:40 pm
Comment: Palladium Books Canon is set solely by Kevin Siembieda, either in person, or by his approval of published material.
Contact:

Re: Caster availability of spells

Unread post by eliakon »

Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:
AntyCrist wrote:So your saying that a Temporal wizard/warrior can learn conventional spells from a gild like a LW? As opposed to being limited to leveling like a Mystic?


Any spellcaster that is not defined as a Mystic can learn common invocation magic from another spellcaster (or scroll).

Maybe.

Most casters say that they can learn new spells, which means that they can learn new spells.
Many other classes say that they can NOT learn new spells, which likewise means they can not learn new spells.
The trouble is that there are some classes/races/whatever that do not clearly define either way. For those beings the GM will have to make a call. And some GMs say that they can, and some GMs say that they can't. Until such time as we get an official statement on those classes/races/whatever there is no "right way" to do it, because there is no 'default way' that magic works!
The rules are not a bludgeon with which to hammer a character into a game. They are a guide to how a group of friends can get together to weave a collective story that entertains everyone involved. We forget that at our peril.

Edmund Burke wrote:The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."
Colonel_Tetsuya
Champion
Posts: 2172
Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2012 3:22 am

Re: Caster availability of spells

Unread post by Colonel_Tetsuya »

Shark_Force wrote:
Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:
AntyCrist wrote:So your saying that a Temporal wizard/warrior can learn conventional spells from a gild like a LW? As opposed to being limited to leveling like a Mystic?


Any spellcaster that is not defined as a Mystic can learn common invocation magic from another spellcaster (or scroll).


not quite true. there are, for example, warlocks.


Good catch, i frequently forget Warlocks.

They are the only exception i can think of, though, and the OCC clearly states they cant learn spells the traditional way.

Edit: That silly Fusionist class, too.
Im loving the Foes list; it's the only thing keeping me from tearing out my eyes from the dumb.
AntyCrist
D-Bee
Posts: 5
Joined: Sun Aug 13, 2017 6:06 pm

Re: Caster availability of spells

Unread post by AntyCrist »

Shark_Force wrote:
Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:
AntyCrist wrote:So your saying that a Temporal wizard/warrior can learn conventional spells from a gild like a LW? As opposed to being limited to leveling like a Mystic?


Any spellcaster that is not defined as a Mystic can learn common invocation magic from another spellcaster (or scroll).


not quite true. there are, for example, warlocks.

that said, every OCC should tell you whether or not they can learn spells from various sources. in older materials, that may be somewhat complicated to tell, however... because it used to be standard to write something to the effect of "has ley line walker abilites 1-9" or similar. except, the RUE ley line walker is not the same as the RMB ley line walker...

Shark_Force wrote:
Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:
AntyCrist wrote:So your saying that a Temporal wizard/warrior can learn conventional spells from a gild like a LW? As opposed to being limited to leveling like a Mystic?


Any spellcaster that is not defined as a Mystic can learn common invocation magic from another spellcaster (or scroll).


not quite true. there are, for example, warlocks.

that said, every OCC should tell you whether or not they can learn spells from various sources. in older materials, that may be somewhat complicated to tell, however... because it used to be standard to write something to the effect of "has ley line walker abilites 1-9" or similar. except, the RUE ley line walker is not the same as the RMB ley line walker...

That's the problem RWB3 (England) does not specify.
User avatar
drewkitty ~..~
Monk
Posts: 17737
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2000 1:01 am
Location: Eastvale, calif
Contact:

Re: Caster availability of spells

Unread post by drewkitty ~..~ »

Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:Any spell caster that is not defined as a Mystic can learn common invocation magic from another spell caster (or scroll).

The above statement is inherently untrue because it is too broad of a generalization.
There are specialty mages that cannot learn common magic spells from a common magic mage. However, it is easier to find these mage types outside the Rifts setting.

From Rifts, the line maker mages from SA2 are two that come to mind.
[The Necromancer text limits what common magic spells they can be taught, and cost double to cast.]


In other settings:
...Mirror mage & fleshsculpter (NB);
...Ludicrous mages and Trickster mages (R9.5&BotR for PF&Rifts);
...the Yu Shih/chi archaist, Tao Shih/Immortalist (chinese talismans), Fang Shih/Geomancer(feng shui mage).

A better statement would be ``That any magic user that does not gain spells through mediation when gaining a new level (similar to a mystic), or is limited to a specific type of magic, or have any other limitations about learning spells from others, is a common magic mage.``

--------
Priest, warlock and Witch magics are all granted magics. Granted to the char by a SN being.
May you be blessed with the ability to change course when you are off the mark.
Each question should be give the canon answer 1st, then you can proclaim your house rules.
Reading and writing (literacy) is how people on BBS interact.
Shark_Force
Palladin
Posts: 7128
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 4:11 pm

Re: Caster availability of spells

Unread post by Shark_Force »

drewkitty ~..~ wrote:
Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:Any spell caster that is not defined as a Mystic can learn common invocation magic from another spell caster (or scroll).

The above statement is inherently untrue because it is too broad of a generalization.
There are specialty mages that cannot learn common magic spells from a common magic mage. However, it is easier to find these mage types outside the Rifts setting.

From Rifts, the line maker mages from SA2 are two that come to mind.
[The Necromancer text limits what common magic spells they can be taught, and cost double to cast.]


actually, the list in necromancer iirc is the spells they can learn without double PPE cost. everything else they can still learn, it just costs more.
Colonel_Tetsuya
Champion
Posts: 2172
Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2012 3:22 am

Re: Caster availability of spells

Unread post by Colonel_Tetsuya »

Shark_Force wrote:
drewkitty ~..~ wrote:
Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:Any spell caster that is not defined as a Mystic can learn common invocation magic from another spell caster (or scroll).

The above statement is inherently untrue because it is too broad of a generalization.
There are specialty mages that cannot learn common magic spells from a common magic mage. However, it is easier to find these mage types outside the Rifts setting.

From Rifts, the line maker mages from SA2 are two that come to mind.
[The Necromancer text limits what common magic spells they can be taught, and cost double to cast.]


actually, the list in necromancer iirc is the spells they can learn without double PPE cost. everything else they can still learn, it just costs more.


Correct
Im loving the Foes list; it's the only thing keeping me from tearing out my eyes from the dumb.
User avatar
drewkitty ~..~
Monk
Posts: 17737
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2000 1:01 am
Location: Eastvale, calif
Contact:

Re: Caster availability of spells

Unread post by drewkitty ~..~ »

Shark_Force wrote:
drewkitty ~..~ wrote:
Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:Any spell caster that is not defined as a Mystic can learn common invocation magic from another spell caster (or scroll).

The above statement is inherently untrue because it is too broad of a generalization.
There are specialty mages that cannot learn common magic spells from a common magic mage. However, it is easier to find these mage types outside the Rifts setting.

From Rifts, the line maker mages from SA2 are two that come to mind.
[The Necromancer text limits what common magic spells they can be taught, and cost double to cast.]


actually, the list in necromancer iirc is the spells they can learn without double PPE cost. everything else they can still learn, it just costs more.

Mostly I was meaning from the necro side about learning common magic spells. Which is why that text got written the way it did and got put into [ ].

Not to mention that some GMs might rule that necro magic is a specialty magic that common magic mages cannot learn w/o a class change.
May you be blessed with the ability to change course when you are off the mark.
Each question should be give the canon answer 1st, then you can proclaim your house rules.
Reading and writing (literacy) is how people on BBS interact.
User avatar
kaid
Knight
Posts: 4089
Joined: Mon Dec 15, 2008 12:23 pm

Re: Caster availability of spells

Unread post by kaid »

One thing to note if you are curious if an OCC can learn spells by paying money to get taught them check the OCC's spells learned blurb. It should say specifically if they are capable of learning spells or if they just gain x many per level.
Colonel_Tetsuya
Champion
Posts: 2172
Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2012 3:22 am

Re: Caster availability of spells

Unread post by Colonel_Tetsuya »

kaid wrote:One thing to note if you are curious if an OCC can learn spells by paying money to get taught them check the OCC's spells learned blurb. It should say specifically if they are capable of learning spells or if they just gain x many per level.


About a dozen so far (im only rough the world books) dont say at all. Per level or learn or whatever.

Thankfully RUE/RMB have you covered - if you are an invocation caster (remember, a decent number of the specialist classes are NOT), and not a mystic, you can learn spells whenever you want, provided you have a teacher.

Ill get through the sourcebooks and dimension books later today, but so far, other than the classes that just dont list at all (most of which i attribute tomeditorial laziness or page cutting, as six or seven of the culprits are the Vanguard casters which are all "Ley Line Walker Variants), all of the invocation casters can either learns spells whenever or are mystics of some stripe (shamans, for instance, almost universally say "like other mystics..." or "just like Mystics, Shamans..." in their write-ups; the few that dont CAN learn spells at will (and say so in their desc)). Even the Magi CAN learn outside of their Magi training, it just says that they "usually" dont.

Short version is, unless youre same flavor of mystic/tribal caster, or one of the specialist outliers (Warlocks, Whale-Singers, Fusionist, stuff like that), you can learn invocations any time unless your OCC specifically forbids it (a very few, like Conjuror, do)... because RUE/RMB say you can. So unless your OCC says you cant...
Im loving the Foes list; it's the only thing keeping me from tearing out my eyes from the dumb.
AntyCrist
D-Bee
Posts: 5
Joined: Sun Aug 13, 2017 6:06 pm

Re: Caster availability of spells

Unread post by AntyCrist »

kaid wrote:One thing to note if you are curious if an OCC can learn spells by paying money to get taught them check the OCC's spells learned blurb. It should say specifically if they are capable of learning spells or if they just gain x many per level.

The problem is most of the early WB spell caster classes do not specify. The particularly case I'm having trouble with is the temporal wiz/war from RWB3:England.
User avatar
kaid
Knight
Posts: 4089
Joined: Mon Dec 15, 2008 12:23 pm

Re: Caster availability of spells

Unread post by kaid »

Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:
kaid wrote:One thing to note if you are curious if an OCC can learn spells by paying money to get taught them check the OCC's spells learned blurb. It should say specifically if they are capable of learning spells or if they just gain x many per level.


About a dozen so far (im only rough the world books) dont say at all. Per level or learn or whatever.

Thankfully RUE/RMB have you covered - if you are an invocation caster (remember, a decent number of the specialist classes are NOT), and not a mystic, you can learn spells whenever you want, provided you have a teacher.

Ill get through the sourcebooks and dimension books later today, but so far, other than the classes that just dont list at all (most of which i attribute tomeditorial laziness or page cutting, as six or seven of the culprits are the Vanguard casters which are all "Ley Line Walker Variants), all of the invocation casters can either learns spells whenever or are mystics of some stripe (shamans, for instance, almost universally say "like other mystics..." or "just like Mystics, Shamans..." in their write-ups; the few that dont CAN learn spells at will (and say so in their desc)). Even the Magi CAN learn outside of their Magi training, it just says that they "usually" dont.

Short version is, unless youre same flavor of mystic/tribal caster, or one of the specialist outliers (Warlocks, Whale-Singers, Fusionist, stuff like that), you can learn invocations any time unless your OCC specifically forbids it (a very few, like Conjuror, do)... because RUE/RMB say you can. So unless your OCC says you cant...



Yup basically are you more of a priest or get your powers granted from some higher power you get your stuff per level. Otherwise more likely than not you can learn them for money.
Colonel_Tetsuya
Champion
Posts: 2172
Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2012 3:22 am

Re: Caster availability of spells

Unread post by Colonel_Tetsuya »

AntyCrist wrote:
kaid wrote:One thing to note if you are curious if an OCC can learn spells by paying money to get taught them check the OCC's spells learned blurb. It should say specifically if they are capable of learning spells or if they just gain x many per level.

The problem is most of the early WB spell caster classes do not specify. The particularly case I'm having trouble with is the temporal wiz/war from RWB3:England.


Covered, as i already posted. Are they a mystic? (No). Then pursuant to RMB/RUE (190 in RUE, but the text is unchanged in any way from RMB, which were the rules that obtained when WB3 was written) you can learn any spell you like whenever you like as long as you have a teacher or scroll.
Im loving the Foes list; it's the only thing keeping me from tearing out my eyes from the dumb.
User avatar
drewkitty ~..~
Monk
Posts: 17737
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2000 1:01 am
Location: Eastvale, calif
Contact:

Re: Caster availability of spells

Unread post by drewkitty ~..~ »

AntyCrist wrote:snip... The particularly case I'm having trouble with is the temporal wiz/war from RWB3:England.


drewkitty ~..~ wrote:snip...
LLW, Temp.Wiz/War., TW, Shifters are all 'common magic mages" that can learn/teach spells between each other.
…snip

----------------------------------------------
side-note: anyone wanting to use a scroll has to be able to read the language the scroll is written in.
Thus if a mage cannot read the scroll…they can't try to convert into a usable spell.
May you be blessed with the ability to change course when you are off the mark.
Each question should be give the canon answer 1st, then you can proclaim your house rules.
Reading and writing (literacy) is how people on BBS interact.
Shark_Force
Palladin
Posts: 7128
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 4:11 pm

Re: Caster availability of spells

Unread post by Shark_Force »

drewkitty ~..~ wrote:Not to mention that some GMs might rule that necro magic is a specialty magic that common magic mages cannot learn w/o a class change.


the DM could rule that.

but then again, the DM can rule anything they want. that doesn't mean it says that anywhere in the books. the section on necromancy is quite clear; ley line walkers, temporal wizards, shifters, and dragons can all learn necro-magic if they find a willing teacher, and are willing to pay double PPE costs.

it is made even more clear in the note at the top of page 186 in the book of magic: "The P.P.E. cost listed is the cost for Necromancers. All other magic O.C.C.s must expend twice that P.P.E. amount to cast the exact same Necro-Spell."

so, yeah... necro-magic is regular invocation magic. necromancers happen to have specialized in this subset of invocation magic, at the expense of the regular level of mastery other invocation magic (which they pay double PPE costs for). it is no different from shifters being able to pay less for certain invocation magic that is specifically related to their own area of specialty.
User avatar
drewkitty ~..~
Monk
Posts: 17737
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2000 1:01 am
Location: Eastvale, calif
Contact:

Re: Caster availability of spells

Unread post by drewkitty ~..~ »

I think a good analogy would be that nerco magic is a dialect of the common magic style. Both sides able to talk to each other but have a bit of trouble talking in the others way of speaking. (within the limits of analogies, that even a good one does not fit 'exactly'.)

Unlike how Line Makers mages and Chi Mages speak totally different languages when compared to common magic mages.(to continue the analogy just a bit further.)

Defining my words:
♦Mage…a magic user that had to learn their ability to cast magic and can learn new spell from being taught. The LLW, the Wizard, the Arcanisty and Mystic Studies being the the prototypical mage types of Rifts, PF, BTS and HU respectively.
May you be blessed with the ability to change course when you are off the mark.
Each question should be give the canon answer 1st, then you can proclaim your house rules.
Reading and writing (literacy) is how people on BBS interact.
User avatar
eliakon
Palladin
Posts: 9093
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 9:40 pm
Comment: Palladium Books Canon is set solely by Kevin Siembieda, either in person, or by his approval of published material.
Contact:

Re: Caster availability of spells

Unread post by eliakon »

Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:
AntyCrist wrote:
kaid wrote:One thing to note if you are curious if an OCC can learn spells by paying money to get taught them check the OCC's spells learned blurb. It should say specifically if they are capable of learning spells or if they just gain x many per level.

The problem is most of the early WB spell caster classes do not specify. The particularly case I'm having trouble with is the temporal wiz/war from RWB3:England.


Covered, as i already posted. Are they a mystic? (No). Then pursuant to RMB/RUE (190 in RUE, but the text is unchanged in any way from RMB, which were the rules that obtained when WB3 was written) you can learn any spell you like whenever you like as long as you have a teacher or scroll.

The problem with this interpretation is that it violates the canon.
We already have a VAST list of "Practitioners of magic" that are not mystics and can not learn spells
That sort of tells us that the statement is NOT intended to be as broad as you are interpreting it.
The statement holds if you are using only the classes in the RMB or RUE book though...
...but if we go outside the book we find that it falls down on its face as soon as we hit WB2...
Which, to me, suggests that if we can falsify the statement when applied to anything outside of the book it is in... then it probably is not meant to really allow for every class that is not a mystic. Instead I believe is that the section on page 190 is NOT saying that you can always go out and be taught anything. Instead what I think is that it is saying that other than Mystics people are NOT locked into their level for spells. I.e. if you acquire a spell that is higher than your level, you can cast it.
The trick is that you need to be able to acquire that spell. THAT is not a guaranteed ability, but what IS guaranteed is that if you DO learn the spell, then you can use it. This is a very important distinction.

Why?
Lets look at some of the classes that DO say that they can learn spells (which makes them some of the so called "Scholastic mages" as many term them). And find that even there it is quite common to find limits and limitations on what they can or can not learn.

Lord Magus: Does not say if they can learn more spells, which is important since they DO tell us for the Battle Magus. AND if they can, they can never learn spells about level 8. Which means that a statement about learning any spell, or spells above their level is false
Warlock: is not a mystic
Whale Singer: Not a mystic, is taught... but we don't know if they can learn more spells or not
Combat Mage: Can never learn spells over level 8
Forsaken Wizard: (from PF) can only learn a limited number of spells from each "School"
Fusionist: Is not a mystic
Cloud Knight: again not a mystic, but does not say if they can or can not learn more
Cloud Maker: again not a mystic, but does not say if they can or can not learn more
Line Drawer: Can learn a limited list of spells, so can not learn any spell...
Necromancer: Can only learn a limited list of spells
Old Believer: Again not a mystic, but does not say if they can learn more spells
Stone Master: Is a practitioner of magic, is not a mystic, can not learn spells at all
Conjurer: Is not a mystic, but can not learn more spells
High Magus: Can not learn spells that are lower level than 7 which rules out the "can learn any spell". They may, or may not be able to learn spells from teachers
Diabolist: Practitioner of magic, is not a mystic, can not learn spells
Temporal Wizard: again, not a mystic but does not say they can learn more spells
Temporal Warrior: again, not a mystic but does not say they can learn more spells
Rain Dancer: Not a mystic, is trained, can not learn spells

This sets aside the question of "Who can learn what?" which is even MORE contentious (even trying get the simplest of consensus on this leads to massive flame wars.) I will not try to make a solid list here, that would just be flame bait... but I WILL point out that there are a lot of different "schools" of magic. And even different views on what is or is not an invocation! And not all of them are conducive to people learning. Which again, invalidates the claim that anyone can learn any spell.

In the end I think what we have is that we have a situation where who can buy more spells is not universal. Instead what is universal is that unlike That Other Game That Palladium Grew Out Of, where you can only cast spells of your level or lower Palladium magic is specifically set up to NOT limit casters in that way. Other than Mystics anyone can cast anything... presuming that they have the spell in the first place.
Last edited by eliakon on Tue Aug 15, 2017 8:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.
The rules are not a bludgeon with which to hammer a character into a game. They are a guide to how a group of friends can get together to weave a collective story that entertains everyone involved. We forget that at our peril.

Edmund Burke wrote:The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."
Colonel_Tetsuya
Champion
Posts: 2172
Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2012 3:22 am

Re: Caster availability of spells

Unread post by Colonel_Tetsuya »

eliakon wrote:We already have a VAST list of "Practitioners of magic" that are not mystics and can not learn spells


No, we actually dont. So far, with only the Dimension Books to go through.. we're up to about.... 10. Five of whom are "Line Walker Variants" from the CS Vanguard book, and they dont say they cant, they just dont say.... and two more (Temporal Wizard, and Temporal Warrior) from WB3 that also just dont say.

Your opinion may vary of course, but I am simply looking at the classes as written and noting that just off the top of my head I can come up with a couple dozen counter examples.


I seriously doubt that, since i haven't found a dozen examples in print in the entire canon.

Things like Warlocks do not count, as they are not incantation magic practitioners.

When you remove the half-ish of the casters that do not cast incantation magic at all (meaning, this doesn't apply to them in any way).... its not nearly what you think it is.

Ill have a complete list later. Going to go back and hit the Dimension Books tonight.
Im loving the Foes list; it's the only thing keeping me from tearing out my eyes from the dumb.
User avatar
eliakon
Palladin
Posts: 9093
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 9:40 pm
Comment: Palladium Books Canon is set solely by Kevin Siembieda, either in person, or by his approval of published material.
Contact:

Re: Caster availability of spells

Unread post by eliakon »

Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:
eliakon wrote:We already have a VAST list of "Practitioners of magic" that are not mystics and can not learn spells


No, we actually dont. So far, with only the Dimension Books to go through.. we're up to about.... 10. Five of whom are "Line Walker Variants" from the CS Vanguard book, and they dont say they cant, they just dont say.... and two more (Temporal Wizard, and Temporal Warrior) from WB3 that also just dont say.

Your opinion may vary of course, but I am simply looking at the classes as written and noting that just off the top of my head I can come up with a couple dozen counter examples.


I seriously doubt that, since i haven't found a dozen examples in print in the entire canon.

Things like Warlocks do not count, as they are not incantation magic practitioners.

Right there your moving the goal posts though :lol:
The quote you are using does not say "Magic Practitioners who cast Invocation style spells"
It says "Magic Practitioners"
You can't cherry pick only things that support your case and dismiss anything that doesn't support it as not counting.
Not if you want to actually support your interpretation.

Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:When you remove the half-ish of the casters that do not cast incantation magic at all (meaning, this doesn't apply to them in any way).... its not nearly what you think it is.

I think that the entire sentence from the book needs to be upheld in its entirety and that if a "Defense" of the sentence requires moving the goal posts and ignoring part of the sentence then that "defense" has already been invalidated.

Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:Ill have a complete list later. Going to go back and hit the Dimension Books tonight.

Do you plan on actually including all Practitioners of Magic or just cherry picking out the ones that you feel will support your case?
The rules are not a bludgeon with which to hammer a character into a game. They are a guide to how a group of friends can get together to weave a collective story that entertains everyone involved. We forget that at our peril.

Edmund Burke wrote:The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."
Shark_Force
Palladin
Posts: 7128
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 4:11 pm

Re: Caster availability of spells

Unread post by Shark_Force »

*shrug* well, allow me to settle the question of whether temporal wizards at least are able to learn spells by study:

the necromancy section in the book of magic (and possibly in other sources such as rifts africa or rifts russia) explicitly mentions temporal wizards by name as one of the classes that the necromancer can teach necro-magic to.

so they definitely for sure 100% learn spells by study.

as to other classes, pretty much just make a judgment call imo.
User avatar
eliakon
Palladin
Posts: 9093
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 9:40 pm
Comment: Palladium Books Canon is set solely by Kevin Siembieda, either in person, or by his approval of published material.
Contact:

Re: Caster availability of spells

Unread post by eliakon »

Shark_Force wrote:*shrug* well, allow me to settle the question of whether temporal wizards at least are able to learn spells by study:

the necromancy section in the book of magic (and possibly in other sources such as rifts africa or rifts russia) explicitly mentions temporal wizards by name as one of the classes that the necromancer can teach necro-magic to.

so they definitely for sure 100% learn spells by study.

Good find!
Thanks, this was very helpful, at least to me.
The rules are not a bludgeon with which to hammer a character into a game. They are a guide to how a group of friends can get together to weave a collective story that entertains everyone involved. We forget that at our peril.

Edmund Burke wrote:The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."
Colonel_Tetsuya
Champion
Posts: 2172
Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2012 3:22 am

Re: Caster availability of spells

Unread post by Colonel_Tetsuya »

Okay, after a *fairly* exhaustive search (i dont have all the books available as i dont buy them all anymore and have returned many of the ones ive had on loan for some time and skipped a few books i "knew" didn't have magic OCCs (like CWC, FQ, etc) that i may have been mistaken about...) this is the list of invocation casters, and how and when they can learn spells.

Incantation spellcasters

Mystic - M
Ley Line Walker - Y
Shifter - Y
Techno Wizard - Y
Cernun Mystic - M
Dragon Hatchlings - Y
Temporal Wizard - Y (BoM says they can be taught/learn spells, WB3 entry says nothing)
Temporal Warrior - Y (BoM says they can be taught/learn spells, WB3 entry says nothing)
Chiang-Ku Dragon - Y (Same as other hatchlings)
Necromancer - Y
Medicine Man - Y
Rain Maker - Y
Gypsy Thief - Y
Gyspy Seer - M
Voodoo Priest - M
Biomancer - M
Whale Singer - Y
Ocean Wizard - Y
Sea Druid - M
Ninja Techno-Wizard - Y
Indian Shamans (multiple) - M
Battle Magus - Y (says merely that “they don’t often”)
Controller Magus - Y (says merely that “they don’t often”)
Lord Magus - Y (says merely that “they don’t often”)
High Magus - Y (says merely that “they don’t often”)
Conjuror - N (but Conjuror gets NO additional spells ever; “not a traditional spell caster”)
Mystic Knight - M
Night Witch (Russia) - Y
Hidden Witch - M
Born Mystic - M
Fire Sorcerer - Y
Old Believer - M
Slayer - Y
Sham-Man (Aus) - N/Limited Spell-casting
Song Juicer - Y
Eco Wizard - Y
Inuit Shaman - M
Staphra Mystic - M
White Rose Mystic Knights - M
Biomancer Gene-Mage - M
Vanguard Espionage Agent - doesn’t say; this class is called a “Line Walker Variant” however
Vanguard Waylayer - doesn’t say; this class is called a “Line Walker Variant” however
Vanguard Savant - doesn’t say; this class is called a “Line Walker Variant” however
Vanguard Translocator - doesn’t say; this class is called a “Line Walker Variant” however
Vanguard Mystic Spy - M
Vanguard Mystic Thief - M
Combat Mage - Y (limited to 8th and below, however)
Rift Runner - Doesn’t say, this class is called a “combination Line Walker/Rifter and Shifter” however
Super Spy (Mercenaries) - Y
Silhoutte - M
Warlock Marine Magic Specialist - Y
Obsidian Spell Thief - Y (limited to 9th level and lower, but can even “steal”/learn magic from usually restricted classes - like warlock magic, et al)
Space Warlock - Y/N - if a “traditional” Warlock, then they are restricted like Warlocks, if they are not, they can learn like anyone else.
Techno-Smithy - Y

Y = they can learn from being taught, or scrolls. Unequivocally.
N = they cannot learn from being taught, at all AND they aren't a Mystic variant.
M = they are Mystic or Variant thereof (all of the Native American Shamans, for instance, say "Like Other Mystics..." or "Just like the Mystic" - same with the Inuit Shaman, etc)
the ones that dont say one way or the other are marked separately.

So what we have are:

> 2 definitive "No"s - but both classes are listed as being "not very adept at magic". (Conjuror and Sham-man).
> 5 that don't say, all 5 of which are also pointed out as being variants or combinations of Line Walkers/Rifters or Shifters. Since they don't say, however, and they are CLEARLY not Mystics, they are covered under the general rule in RUE (and the RMB when it mattered) of on Page 190.
> 27 definitive "Yes"; 32 if you include the 5 above.
> 19 Mystics or variants thereof.

I'd say.... The rule is pretty clear and well defined and well followed throughout the Rifts canon. Which is odd, because few other things like this are consistent.

This does NOT take into account people who dont cast traditional incantation magic of any kind - like Lyn-Syrial Cloud Mages, Blue Flame Shamans, Warlocks, et al. Because they can ONLY learn their type of magic and do NOT cast incantation magic.

I also dont have either China WB, Triax 2, Heroes of Humanity, or the new Atlantean book available to me as of the moment, and i may have missed an OCC here or there if i "skipped" a book i thought didnt contain any magic OCCs (like CWC) or in one of the obscure sourcebooks (like an adventure book or index as i dont have all of those available).

Edit: i need to go back and check both Biomancers and make sure they can even use regular incantation magic. If they cant, then they dont belong on this list. Will check later.
Im loving the Foes list; it's the only thing keeping me from tearing out my eyes from the dumb.
User avatar
eliakon
Palladin
Posts: 9093
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 9:40 pm
Comment: Palladium Books Canon is set solely by Kevin Siembieda, either in person, or by his approval of published material.
Contact:

Re: Caster availability of spells

Unread post by eliakon »

Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:Okay, after a *fairly* exhaustive search (i dont have all the books available as i dont buy them all anymore and have returned many of the ones ive had on loan for some time and skipped a few books i "knew" didn't have magic OCCs (like CWC, FQ, etc) that i may have been mistaken about...) this is the list of invocation casters, and how and when they can learn spells.

Which already is a problem since the rule you are quoting does not say "invocation specialists" it says "Practitoners of Magic"
Which means that already the exercise has failed since you are not supporting what is written, but a totally different, lesser, standard
The words "Strawman" and "moving the goal posts" come to mind. However, let us look at this list...

Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:Incantation spellcasters

Spoiler:
Mystic - M
Ley Line Walker - Y
Shifter - Y
Techno Wizard - Y
Cernun Mystic - M
Dragon Hatchlings - Y
Temporal Wizard - Y (BoM says they can be taught/learn spells, WB3 entry says nothing)
Temporal Warrior - Y (BoM says they can be taught/learn spells, WB3 entry says nothing)
Chiang-Ku Dragon - Y (Same as other hatchlings)
Necromancer - Y
Medicine Man - Y
Rain Maker - Y
Gypsy Thief - Y
Gyspy Seer - M
Voodoo Priest - M
Biomancer - M
Whale Singer - Y
Ocean Wizard - Y
Sea Druid - M
Ninja Techno-Wizard - Y
Indian Shamans (multiple) - M

Battle Magus - Y (says merely that “they don’t often”)
Controller Magus - Y (says merely that “they don’t often”)
Lord Magus - Y (says merely that “they don’t often”)

Hmmm, your book is different than mine.
Mine does not have that text in it.
Which edition and page are you looking at
Because "most stop searching for new spell invocations" is not the same thing...
...since they get a set number of spells per level it could simply mean that they have empty unused slots.

Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:High Magus - Y (says merely that “they don’t often”)

it also says that a maximum of 2d4+2 spells can be learned.
Which is not the same thing.

Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:
Spoiler:
Conjuror - N (but Conjuror gets NO additional spells ever; “not a traditional spell caster”)
Mystic Knight - M
Night Witch (Russia) - Y
Hidden Witch - M
Born Mystic - M
Fire Sorcerer - Y


Old Believer - M

Not a mystic. They learn spells by intuition but there is no text saying they are a Mystic...
...changing the definitions of what is a Mystic to support your case does not prove it. It disproves it in fact..

Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:Slayer - Y
Sham-Man (Aus) - N/Limited Spell-casting

So rule breaker #1

Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:Song Juicer - Y

Odd this says it learns spells like a mystic... so why do you say they CAN learn spells?
Again this looks like you are redefining things to fit your narrative

Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:Eco Wizard - Y
Inuit Shaman - M
Staphra Mystic - M
White Rose Mystic Knights - M

Biomancer Gene-Mage - M

Again... where is the text that says this is a Mystic?

Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:
Spoiler:
Vanguard Espionage Agent - doesn’t say; this class is called a “Line Walker Variant” however
Vanguard Waylayer - doesn’t say; this class is called a “Line Walker Variant” however
Vanguard Savant - doesn’t say; this class is called a “Line Walker Variant” however
Vanguard Translocator - doesn’t say; this class is called a “Line Walker Variant” however
Vanguard Mystic Spy - M
Vanguard Mystic Thief - M
Combat Mage - Y (limited to 8th and below, however)

So yet another rule breaker

Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:Rift Runner - Doesn’t say, this class is called a “combination Line Walker/Rifter and Shifter” however
Super Spy (Mercenaries) - Y
Silhoutte - M

And yet again you are making a statement about being a mystic that is not supported by the text

Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:Warlock Marine Magic Specialist - Y
Obsidian Spell Thief - Y (limited to 9th level and lower, but can even “steal”/learn magic from usually restricted classes - like warlock magic, et al)
Space Warlock - Y/N - if a “traditional” Warlock, then they are restricted like Warlocks, if they are not, they can learn like anyone else.
Techno-Smithy - Y

Y = they can learn from being taught, or scrolls. Unequivocally.
N = they cannot learn from being taught, at all AND they aren't a Mystic variant.
M = they are Mystic or Variant thereof (all of the Native American Shamans, for instance, say "Like Other Mystics..." or "Just like the Mystic" - same with the Inuit Shaman, etc)
the ones that dont say one way or the other are marked separately.

So what we have are:

> 2 definitive "No"s - but both classes are listed as being "not very adept at magic". (Conjuror and Sham-man).
> 5 that don't say, all 5 of which are also pointed out as being variants or combinations of Line Walkers/Rifters or Shifters. Since they don't say, however, and they are CLEARLY not Mystics, they are covered under the general rule in RUE (and the RMB when it mattered) of on Page 190.
> 27 definitive "Yes"; 32 if you include the 5 above.
> 19 Mystics or variants thereof.

A fascinating argument..
...of course it has the problem of being factually wrong but it is fascinating.
You are making a claim that
Bio-Mancers, Gene-Mages, Silhoutes, ect are mystics... with no book text. You cant simply claim that they are mystics.

Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:I'd say.... The rule is pretty clear and well defined and well followed throughout the Rifts canon. Which is odd, because few other things like this are consistent.

This does NOT take into account people who dont cast traditional incantation magic of any kind - like Lyn-Syrial Cloud Mages, Blue Flame Shamans, Warlocks, et al. Because they can ONLY learn their type of magic and do NOT cast incantation magic.

Which doesn't matter.
They are "practitioners of magic"
The rule you are citing does NOT say anything about the kind of mage, just that they are "Practitioners of Magic"
So again, you are ignoring all the data that conflicts with your statement, and again cherry picking and moved goal posts prove nothing.

Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:I also dont have either China WB, Triax 2, Heroes of Humanity, or the new Atlantean book available to me as of the moment, and i may have missed an OCC here or there if i "skipped" a book i thought didnt contain any magic OCCs (like CWC) or in one of the obscure sourcebooks (like an adventure book or index as i dont have all of those available).


Your list is already a demonstration of how logical fallacies work though.
You redefined a term from what the book says to what you want it to say,
Then you take all conflicting data and dismiss it out of hand
Which means that of course you are left with only supporting data
Cherry Picking though proves nothing.

If we were to make an honest list of all the practitioners of magic, honestly categorize them as the book describes them not how a house rule does, and then put THAT list to the test the answer is FAR different.

Which basically tells me that my original contention is correct.
That the rule is not some mythical rule about "anyone can learn spells" it is a clarification on the rule that you can cast spells above your own level and nothing else.
The rules are not a bludgeon with which to hammer a character into a game. They are a guide to how a group of friends can get together to weave a collective story that entertains everyone involved. We forget that at our peril.

Edmund Burke wrote:The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."
Colonel_Tetsuya
Champion
Posts: 2172
Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2012 3:22 am

Re: Caster availability of spells

Unread post by Colonel_Tetsuya »

Edit:

Made the mistake of clicking on Eli's post to see what his response was.

Problem corrected. Shouldn't have bothered.

Not only nothing intelligent to say, but im already annoyed enough at the political asshattery going on in the US right now that i dont even want to deal with trying to debunk his drivel.

Warning: Insults and trolling. Mack
Im loving the Foes list; it's the only thing keeping me from tearing out my eyes from the dumb.
User avatar
drewkitty ~..~
Monk
Posts: 17737
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2000 1:01 am
Location: Eastvale, calif
Contact:

Re: Caster availability of spells

Unread post by drewkitty ~..~ »

I notice that the Line Maker Mage was left out of your list CT.
And you earlier claim was that "Any spellcaster that is not defined as a Mystic can learn common invocation magic from another spellcaster (or scroll)."

And the LM is a spell caster and is not a mystic. But they can't learn common magic invocations.

Thus your absolute statement is in error. So maybe correct your error by modifying you statement to take in account this new (2nd time said) knowledge into your new statement?????? Maybe inclused something saying you are only talking about rifts mages?

-----
The Larhold Shaman is also missing (mystic-like).
Warlocks are also mystic like cause their spells are gained intuitively.

I would not of included the Silhoutte nor dragons in the list. Their magic abilities are tied to their SN natures. Balrogs are also spell casting beings. Yep, not stated out like optional PC races, so who knows…maybe young B's have to work up to being criminal donkeys.
May you be blessed with the ability to change course when you are off the mark.
Each question should be give the canon answer 1st, then you can proclaim your house rules.
Reading and writing (literacy) is how people on BBS interact.
User avatar
eliakon
Palladin
Posts: 9093
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 9:40 pm
Comment: Palladium Books Canon is set solely by Kevin Siembieda, either in person, or by his approval of published material.
Contact:

Re: Caster availability of spells

Unread post by eliakon »

drewkitty ~..~ wrote:I notice that the Line Maker Mage was left out of your list CT.
And you earlier claim was that "Any spellcaster that is not defined as a Mystic can learn common invocation magic from another spellcaster (or scroll)."

And the LM is a spell caster and is not a mystic. But they can't learn common magic invocations.

Thus your absolute statement is in error. So maybe correct your error by modifying you statement to take in account this new (2nd time said) knowledge into your new statement?????? Maybe inclused something saying you are only talking about rifts mages?

-----
The Larhold Shaman is also missing (mystic-like).
Warlocks are also mystic like cause their spells are gained intuitively.

I would not of included the Silhoutte nor dragons in the list. Their magic abilities are tied to their SN natures. Balrogs are also spell casting beings. Yep, not stated out like optional PC races, so who knows…maybe young B's have to work up to being criminal donkeys.

Maybe the solution is to find a way to make the claimed sentence make sense?
I think the problem is that people are trying to make the sentence say something that I don't think it says.
It just says that you can cast spells above your level.
Full stop
THEN a second clause says that spells are for sale.

Two independent clauses
If looked at that way then it makes 100% absolute sense and works with any and all practitioners of magic.
It is when people try to make the sentence say something else. Something like "if you are not a mystic you can always buy spells" that it falls down, because that is demonstrably false.
The rules are not a bludgeon with which to hammer a character into a game. They are a guide to how a group of friends can get together to weave a collective story that entertains everyone involved. We forget that at our peril.

Edmund Burke wrote:The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."
User avatar
Blue_Lion
Knight
Posts: 6226
Joined: Tue Oct 16, 2001 1:01 am
Location: Clone Lab 27

Re: Caster availability of spells

Unread post by Blue_Lion »

AntyCrist wrote:
kaid wrote:One thing to note if you are curious if an OCC can learn spells by paying money to get taught them check the OCC's spells learned blurb. It should say specifically if they are capable of learning spells or if they just gain x many per level.

The problem is most of the early WB spell caster classes do not specify. The particularly case I'm having trouble with is the temporal wiz/war from RWB3:England.
Learning spells through study is a default mechanic listed on its own. Some mage classes restate they use this. Not learning spells from study is only known to exist in cases we are told it exists. So not learning spells can be seen as a limitation, that should be stated.

I see it this way, the ability to learn any level spell through study is a the default when some one can not learn spells that way or some limit is on them learning spells we are told so in the write up. This makes the ones that can not the exception to the rule.
The Clones are coming you shall all be replaced, but who is to say you have not been replaced already.

Master of Type-O and the obvios.

Soon my army oc clones and winged-monkies will rule the world but first, must .......

I may debate canon and RAW, but the games I run are highly house ruled. So I am not debating for how I play but about how the system works as written.
User avatar
eliakon
Palladin
Posts: 9093
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 9:40 pm
Comment: Palladium Books Canon is set solely by Kevin Siembieda, either in person, or by his approval of published material.
Contact:

Re: Caster availability of spells

Unread post by eliakon »

Blue_Lion wrote:
AntyCrist wrote:
kaid wrote:One thing to note if you are curious if an OCC can learn spells by paying money to get taught them check the OCC's spells learned blurb. It should say specifically if they are capable of learning spells or if they just gain x many per level.

The problem is most of the early WB spell caster classes do not specify. The particularly case I'm having trouble with is the temporal wiz/war from RWB3:England.
Learning spells through study is a default mechanic listed on its own.

That is the problem though.
It really ISN'T a default mechanic listed on its own.
Some people keep trying to combine two different statements together to make that the case, but it really isn't.
One paragraph says you can cast a spell of a level higher than your class level.
A second different paragraph says that practitioners of magic can sometimes find a teacher of magic and that if they do, this is the price scale.
The second paragraph does NOT say that they can always use that teacher.
And since we KNOW that most practitioners of magic can NOT learn spells it is obvious that the claim that all practitioners of magic can learn spells is inherently false.

Blue_Lion wrote: Some mage classes restate they use this. Not learning spells from study is only known to exist in cases we are told it exists. So not learning spells can be seen as a limitation, that should be stated.

Again, this is not correct.
The ability to learn spells is not a default because there is no default.
The only default is that you can cast spells of a level higher than you. Full stop.

Blue_Lion wrote:I see it this way, the ability to learn any level spell through study is a the default when some one can not learn spells that way or some limit is on them learning spells we are told so in the write up. This makes the ones that can not the exception to the rule.

That is a nice house rule...
...but it conflicts with the written rules.
Which is the prerogative of a GM of course.
But it still conflicts with the canon.
The rules are not a bludgeon with which to hammer a character into a game. They are a guide to how a group of friends can get together to weave a collective story that entertains everyone involved. We forget that at our peril.

Edmund Burke wrote:The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."
User avatar
Blue_Lion
Knight
Posts: 6226
Joined: Tue Oct 16, 2001 1:01 am
Location: Clone Lab 27

Re: Caster availability of spells

Unread post by Blue_Lion »

Actually pursuits of magic as a whole covers learning spells by being taught.

The thing is you are trying to put a few phrases in a vacuum and ignoring the text as a whole to create a house rule where it is not the default. When the whole section pursuit of magic is discussing learning spells by being taught. So the pursuit of magic section makes the mechanic to learn spells a default game mechanic.

See when a class has text like-Of course the shifter can still purchase and learn spells in the same manner as other magic user, .... is stating the default is magic users can learn magic as a default.
Then the mystic -Unlike the other magic OCC the Mystic can-not be taught nor purchase additional spell knowledge....Is stating not being able to taught is a special disadvantage.

Looking at that the classes in RUE are treating learning magic by instruction the default and the inability to learn a spell a special case.

So the default of being able to learn a spell by instruction-as stated in pursuits of magic, supported by class base text, with not bein able to be taught as the acceptation to the rule that should be stated.

Simply-As learning spells is a set of rules outside specific classes that makes it a general non-class specific rule. Not applying that rule requires being told not to. You must be told you can not learn spell by purchase or trade.
The Clones are coming you shall all be replaced, but who is to say you have not been replaced already.

Master of Type-O and the obvios.

Soon my army oc clones and winged-monkies will rule the world but first, must .......

I may debate canon and RAW, but the games I run are highly house ruled. So I am not debating for how I play but about how the system works as written.
TeeAychEeMarchHare
Explorer
Posts: 145
Joined: Wed Sep 06, 2017 2:56 pm
Comment: War to the knife, knife to the hilt.

Re: Caster availability of spells

Unread post by TeeAychEeMarchHare »

AntyCrist wrote:
Shark_Force wrote:
Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:
AntyCrist wrote:So your saying that a Temporal wizard/warrior can learn conventional spells from a gild like a LW? As opposed to being limited to leveling like a Mystic?


Any spellcaster that is not defined as a Mystic can learn common invocation magic from another spellcaster (or scroll).


not quite true. there are, for example, warlocks.

that said, every OCC should tell you whether or not they can learn spells from various sources. in older materials, that may be somewhat complicated to tell, however... because it used to be standard to write something to the effect of "has ley line walker abilites 1-9" or similar. except, the RUE ley line walker is not the same as the RMB ley line walker...

Shark_Force wrote:
Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:
AntyCrist wrote:So your saying that a Temporal wizard/warrior can learn conventional spells from a gild like a LW? As opposed to being limited to leveling like a Mystic?


Any spellcaster that is not defined as a Mystic can learn common invocation magic from another spellcaster (or scroll).


not quite true. there are, for example, warlocks.

that said, every OCC should tell you whether or not they can learn spells from various sources. in older materials, that may be somewhat complicated to tell, however... because it used to be standard to write something to the effect of "has ley line walker abilites 1-9" or similar. except, the RUE ley line walker is not the same as the RMB ley line walker...

That's the problem RWB3 (England) does not specify.


Are you sure? My favourite Rifts character was a Temporal Warrior, and I could have sworn it mentioned being able to buy or learn spells at any time. That's one of the reasons I took that class (plus Temporal magic seemed like it would be fun, and I liked the idea of a fighter/mage).
Too much ammo is a self-correcting problem.
User avatar
The Beast
Demon Lord Extraordinaire
Posts: 5956
Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2005 3:28 pm
Comment: You probably think this comment is about you, don't you?
Location: Apocrypha

Re: Caster availability of spells

Unread post by The Beast »

TeeAychEeMarchHare wrote:
AntyCrist wrote:
Shark_Force wrote:
Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:
AntyCrist wrote:So your saying that a Temporal wizard/warrior can learn conventional spells from a gild like a LW? As opposed to being limited to leveling like a Mystic?


Any spellcaster that is not defined as a Mystic can learn common invocation magic from another spellcaster (or scroll).


not quite true. there are, for example, warlocks.

that said, every OCC should tell you whether or not they can learn spells from various sources. in older materials, that may be somewhat complicated to tell, however... because it used to be standard to write something to the effect of "has ley line walker abilites 1-9" or similar. except, the RUE ley line walker is not the same as the RMB ley line walker...

Shark_Force wrote:
Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:
AntyCrist wrote:So your saying that a Temporal wizard/warrior can learn conventional spells from a gild like a LW? As opposed to being limited to leveling like a Mystic?


Any spellcaster that is not defined as a Mystic can learn common invocation magic from another spellcaster (or scroll).


not quite true. there are, for example, warlocks.

that said, every OCC should tell you whether or not they can learn spells from various sources. in older materials, that may be somewhat complicated to tell, however... because it used to be standard to write something to the effect of "has ley line walker abilites 1-9" or similar. except, the RUE ley line walker is not the same as the RMB ley line walker...

That's the problem RWB3 (England) does not specify.


Are you sure? My favourite Rifts character was a Temporal Warrior, and I could have sworn it mentioned being able to buy or learn spells at any time. That's one of the reasons I took that class (plus Temporal magic seemed like it would be fun, and I liked the idea of a fighter/mage).


No they don't. The two classes only state that they learn a new spell upon leveling.

EDIT: I double-checked the other mage-like OCCs that were available at the time and they all (with the exception of the Temporal classes) note if they could or could not learn new spells at any time other than leveling. Even if you go into WB4 the mage-like classes from that book state the same things. As far as I can remember, every group I played with treated both those classes as regular mages as far as learning new spells goes, but I can see the argument for having them only learn upon leveling since that is the only mention of when they learn new spells.

Did Palladium ever clarify this anywhere? It kind of seems too big of an error to go uncorrected for so long.
Shark_Force
Palladin
Posts: 7128
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 4:11 pm

Re: Caster availability of spells

Unread post by Shark_Force »

The Beast wrote:No they don't. The two classes only state that they learn a new spell upon leveling.

EDIT: I double-checked the other mage-like OCCs that were available at the time and they all (with the exception of the Temporal classes) note if they could or could not learn new spells at any time other than leveling. Even if you go into WB4 the mage-like classes from that book state the same things. As far as I can remember, every group I played with treated both those classes as regular mages as far as learning new spells goes, but I can see the argument for having them only learn upon leveling since that is the only mention of when they learn new spells.

Did Palladium ever clarify this anywhere? It kind of seems too big of an error to go uncorrected for so long.


as i mentioned earlier in the thread, the necromancy section of the book of magic explicitly mentions that temporal wizards can be taught necromancy magic, which is standard invocation magic that costs less for necromancers (or costs more for non-necromancers, depending on how you want to look at it).

i would not necessarily call it a correction so much as it is an off-hand reference that tells us what was intended originally, but it does tell us that in kevin's mind, he wrote that temporal wizards can learn spells by study :P

(note: kevin is the only credited author for rifts africa, so yes, he wrote that, not someone else :P )
42dragon
Explorer
Posts: 156
Joined: Wed Dec 10, 2008 9:54 am

Re: Caster availability of spells

Unread post by 42dragon »

I have always just believed that Temporal (Any) casters could learn spells at anytime via way of teacher or scrolls like typical mages. Based on the simple fact that they are not granted spells, they are apprenticed and taught how to be those types of mages. If they can be taught in the beginning they can be taught later. Even if the book didn't specifically call it out.

Now finding a GM that allowed you access to learn additional spell, that is the real hard part. Silly fluff about magic being a closely guarded secret and basically no-one teaches spells above 5th (ish) level on a regular basis.
TeeAychEeMarchHare
Explorer
Posts: 145
Joined: Wed Sep 06, 2017 2:56 pm
Comment: War to the knife, knife to the hilt.

Re: Caster availability of spells

Unread post by TeeAychEeMarchHare »

Hmm. Guess that's what happens when your most recent memory of playing a game is at least 20 years old...

So I went and looked in a few books to see what they had to say.

RUE, p. 190, says "Practitioners of magic, except for the Mystic, can learn and cast spells far above their actual experience level." Then there's a bit about a LLW at 2nd level being able to cast a 10th level spell as an example.

My original main book, printed back in 1991, says the same thing.

I'm thinking that must be why we always played it as "Any magic user can learn spells at any time unless the class specifically says otherwise .

That's just how I've always played, obviously YMMV.
Too much ammo is a self-correcting problem.
Nightmartree
Adventurer
Posts: 497
Joined: Wed Aug 16, 2017 12:49 am
Comment: I don't know what i'm doing, that's for realities GM to figure out
Location: Garden of Dreams

Re: Caster availability of spells

Unread post by Nightmartree »

42dragon wrote:Now finding a GM that allowed you access to learn additional spell, that is the real hard part. Silly fluff about magic being a closely guarded secret and basically no-one teaches spells above 5th (ish) level on a regular basis.


eh i'd buy that fluff, why give other people that power unless you have a reason? Its like selling the blueprints for anything from a RPG (the grenade launcher) to a Nuclear bomb.
User avatar
Nekira Sudacne
Monk
Posts: 15488
Joined: Sun Oct 19, 2003 7:22 pm
Comment: The Munchkin Fairy
Location: 2nd Degree Black Belt of Post Fu
Contact:

Re: Caster availability of spells

Unread post by Nekira Sudacne »

I always felt the main thing about rarely teaching spells above fifth level is mainly to give Mage Guilds a reason to exist. It seemed to me the idea was eventually a player character would become successful enough to pay dues to join one to access their library and more regular teachers more willing to share secrets because they're helping a brother out, one who's earned trust over time, rather than a random stranger.
Sometimes, you're like a beacon of light in the darkness, giving me some hope for humankind. ~ Killer Cyborg

You can have something done good, fast and cheap. If you want it done good and fast, it's not going to be cheap. If you want it done fast and cheap it won't be good. If you want something done good and cheap it won't be done fast. ~ Dark Brandon
42dragon
Explorer
Posts: 156
Joined: Wed Dec 10, 2008 9:54 am

Re: Caster availability of spells

Unread post by 42dragon »

And while that does make perfect sense Nekira, however if my memory holds, the few different places guilds are mentioned: It seems like even then they aren't going to teach you much either (by the book).

Especially if you sort of work backwards from the cost of spells. Most spells 6th level and above would cost what would be the equivalent to a yearly salary and up (mostly way up). A guild would likely require dozen(s) of missions and years of service before they would teach even one 10th level spell.
Eagle
Dungeon Crawler
Posts: 323
Joined: Fri Aug 21, 2015 4:31 pm

Re: Caster availability of spells

Unread post by Eagle »

We always had casters pool their spells. So if I'm playing a Line Walker, and Bob is playing a Shifter, we'd get together and compare what spells we had and we'd learn each others' stuff.

It's easy enough to have your background be "we are close friends from childhood" and so then you trust each other. Our GMs have never been jerks about letting PCs learn new spells. But back in our hyper-competitive D&D days, we'd occasionally have the "Disposable PC", somebody with really good gear who shows up and then dies, leaving all his good stuff behind. "Wouldn't you know, Dave the High Magus had a whole spellbook full of high level magic. Guess he won't be using it anymore." That trick almost always works at least once per GM.

With the sheer number of mages who are supposed to be running around in Rifts, I'd think you'd be almost guaranteed to have a large amount who are simply irresponsible, and that's probably an avenue for spell proliferation. Joey the Line Walker is drunk again and looking to score. A beautiful woman approaches him and starts chatting him up. They go back to her place, and she asks him what he does (as if the outfit didn't give it away). "Oh, I control the forces of the universe, baby. I'm a wizard." And she says "oh wow, what's your most powerful spell? Can you show me? I'd be very interested..." So of course he spends the next 30 minutes telling her how to cast Sorcerer's Fury, while she nibbles on his ear. And of course, some other wizard (presuming the girl isn't one) is in the next room, watching through a portrait with the eyes cut out. Then they knock the guy out and go through his stuff, looking for scrolls or notes or anything else that might give them more info.

You think that wouldn't happen, but I've seen players do way, waaayyy stupider things than that.
User avatar
eliakon
Palladin
Posts: 9093
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 9:40 pm
Comment: Palladium Books Canon is set solely by Kevin Siembieda, either in person, or by his approval of published material.
Contact:

Re: Caster availability of spells

Unread post by eliakon »

Eagle wrote:We always had casters pool their spells. So if I'm playing a Line Walker, and Bob is playing a Shifter, we'd get together and compare what spells we had and we'd learn each others' stuff.

It's easy enough to have your background be "we are close friends from childhood" and so then you trust each other. Our GMs have never been jerks about letting PCs learn new spells. But back in our hyper-competitive D&D days, we'd occasionally have the "Disposable PC", somebody with really good gear who shows up and then dies, leaving all his good stuff behind. "Wouldn't you know, Dave the High Magus had a whole spellbook full of high level magic. Guess he won't be using it anymore." That trick almost always works at least once per GM.

With the sheer number of mages who are supposed to be running around in Rifts, I'd think you'd be almost guaranteed to have a large amount who are simply irresponsible, and that's probably an avenue for spell proliferation. Joey the Line Walker is drunk again and looking to score. A beautiful woman approaches him and starts chatting him up. They go back to her place, and she asks him what he does (as if the outfit didn't give it away). "Oh, I control the forces of the universe, baby. I'm a wizard." And she says "oh wow, what's your most powerful spell? Can you show me? I'd be very interested..." So of course he spends the next 30 minutes telling her how to cast Sorcerer's Fury, while she nibbles on his ear. And of course, some other wizard (presuming the girl isn't one) is in the next room, watching through a portrait with the eyes cut out. Then they knock the guy out and go through his stuff, looking for scrolls or notes or anything else that might give them more info.

You think that wouldn't happen, but I've seen players do way, waaayyy stupider things than that.

The main things that prevent that in Palladium is the lack of spell books, the rarity of scrolls and the sheer amount of time it takes to teach spells.
I have always house ruled spell learning myself because at the official 2 days per level it takes so long that it never works out in game.
The rules are not a bludgeon with which to hammer a character into a game. They are a guide to how a group of friends can get together to weave a collective story that entertains everyone involved. We forget that at our peril.

Edmund Burke wrote:The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."
User avatar
Killer Cyborg
Priest
Posts: 27954
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2001 2:01 am
Comment: "Your Eloquence with a sledge hammer is a beautiful thing..." -Zer0 Kay
Location: In the ocean, punching oncoming waves
Contact:

Re: Caster availability of spells

Unread post by Killer Cyborg »

Eagle wrote:We always had casters pool their spells. So if I'm playing a Line Walker, and Bob is playing a Shifter, we'd get together and compare what spells we had and we'd learn each others' stuff.

It's easy enough to have your background be "we are close friends from childhood" and so then you trust each other. Our GMs have never been jerks about letting PCs learn new spells. But back in our hyper-competitive D&D days, we'd occasionally have the "Disposable PC", somebody with really good gear who shows up and then dies, leaving all his good stuff behind. "Wouldn't you know, Dave the High Magus had a whole spellbook full of high level magic. Guess he won't be using it anymore." That trick almost always works at least once per GM.

With the sheer number of mages who are supposed to be running around in Rifts, I'd think you'd be almost guaranteed to have a large amount who are simply irresponsible, and that's probably an avenue for spell proliferation. Joey the Line Walker is drunk again and looking to score. A beautiful woman approaches him and starts chatting him up. They go back to her place, and she asks him what he does (as if the outfit didn't give it away). "Oh, I control the forces of the universe, baby. I'm a wizard." And she says "oh wow, what's your most powerful spell? Can you show me? I'd be very interested..." So of course he spends the next 30 minutes telling her how to cast Sorcerer's Fury, while she nibbles on his ear. And of course, some other wizard (presuming the girl isn't one) is in the next room, watching through a portrait with the eyes cut out. Then they knock the guy out and go through his stuff, looking for scrolls or notes or anything else that might give them more info.

You think that wouldn't happen, but I've seen players do way, waaayyy stupider things than that.


Guilds tend to crack down on people who give away trade secrets.
I don't see why magic guilds would be any different--it's usually risky to undermine a cartel's lock on a business.
Last edited by Killer Cyborg on Wed Sep 13, 2017 9:43 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Annual Best Poster of the Year Awards (2012)

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

Check out my Author Page on Amazon!
User avatar
eliakon
Palladin
Posts: 9093
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 9:40 pm
Comment: Palladium Books Canon is set solely by Kevin Siembieda, either in person, or by his approval of published material.
Contact:

Re: Caster availability of spells

Unread post by eliakon »

Killer Cyborg wrote:
Eagle wrote:We always had casters pool their spells. So if I'm playing a Line Walker, and Bob is playing a Shifter, we'd get together and compare what spells we had and we'd learn each others' stuff.

It's easy enough to have your background be "we are close friends from childhood" and so then you trust each other. Our GMs have never been jerks about letting PCs learn new spells. But back in our hyper-competitive D&D days, we'd occasionally have the "Disposable PC", somebody with really good gear who shows up and then dies, leaving all his good stuff behind. "Wouldn't you know, Dave the High Magus had a whole spellbook full of high level magic. Guess he won't be using it anymore." That trick almost always works at least once per GM.

With the sheer number of mages who are supposed to be running around in Rifts, I'd think you'd be almost guaranteed to have a large amount who are simply irresponsible, and that's probably an avenue for spell proliferation. Joey the Line Walker is drunk again and looking to score. A beautiful woman approaches him and starts chatting him up. They go back to her place, and she asks him what he does (as if the outfit didn't give it away). "Oh, I control the forces of the universe, baby. I'm a wizard." And she says "oh wow, what's your most powerful spell? Can you show me? I'd be very interested..." So of course he spends the next 30 minutes telling her how to cast Sorcerer's Fury, while she nibbles on his ear. And of course, some other wizard (presuming the girl isn't one) is in the next room, watching through a portrait with the eyes cut out. Then they knock the guy out and go through his stuff, looking for scrolls or notes or anything else that might give them more info.

You think that wouldn't happen, but I've seen players do way, waaayyy stupider things than that.


Guilds tend to make crack down on people who give away trade secrets.
I don't see why magic guilds would be any different--it's usually risky to undermine a cartel's lock on a business.

Because there isn't a cartel?
In most places there isn't just one magic guild?
Because the various guilds are not a monolithic unified whole?
Because there is, quite literally, nothing to suggest otherwise other than the word 'guild' that is very quite explicitly NOT the medieval usage of the word since the whole rest of the guild system is explicitly NOT in play?
Other than those reasons?

The magic 'guilds' in the setting are, at best business clubs. If they even exist in a given city (which is not a given). Since they are a word for word copy of the guild material from the PF books it is pretty safe to assume that they are the same as those 'guilds'. Which had no sort of 'lock' on the magic system at all (unless the specific city in question explicitly said they did). And instead existed as social groups to soak PCs of the booty that they get, and provide a way to let the GM feed information and spells to the party.

Now if you want to houserule your game and make some sort of feudal guild system with apprentices and cartels and the whole bit go ahead...
...but that is totally 100% not justified by the book.
The rules are not a bludgeon with which to hammer a character into a game. They are a guide to how a group of friends can get together to weave a collective story that entertains everyone involved. We forget that at our peril.

Edmund Burke wrote:The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."
TeeAychEeMarchHare
Explorer
Posts: 145
Joined: Wed Sep 06, 2017 2:56 pm
Comment: War to the knife, knife to the hilt.

Re: Caster availability of spells

Unread post by TeeAychEeMarchHare »

Killer Cyborg wrote:
Guilds tend to make crack down on people who give away trade secrets.
I don't see why magic guilds would be any different--it's usually risky to undermine a cartel's lock on a business.


This is true. I think it would depend on the guild's outlook on sharing magic (some might be ok with it, some might be deadly serious about the whole thing), and how powerful and widespread the guild is. Seems to me like a group that's a front for the Federation is going to have a slightly different outlook on this than the Happy Hayseeds Magic Guild and Tire Shop in East BFE, South Dakota. :D But as always, that's just my opinion.
Too much ammo is a self-correcting problem.
User avatar
Killer Cyborg
Priest
Posts: 27954
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2001 2:01 am
Comment: "Your Eloquence with a sledge hammer is a beautiful thing..." -Zer0 Kay
Location: In the ocean, punching oncoming waves
Contact:

Re: Caster availability of spells

Unread post by Killer Cyborg »

eliakon wrote:
Killer Cyborg wrote:
Eagle wrote:We always had casters pool their spells. So if I'm playing a Line Walker, and Bob is playing a Shifter, we'd get together and compare what spells we had and we'd learn each others' stuff.

It's easy enough to have your background be "we are close friends from childhood" and so then you trust each other. Our GMs have never been jerks about letting PCs learn new spells. But back in our hyper-competitive D&D days, we'd occasionally have the "Disposable PC", somebody with really good gear who shows up and then dies, leaving all his good stuff behind. "Wouldn't you know, Dave the High Magus had a whole spellbook full of high level magic. Guess he won't be using it anymore." That trick almost always works at least once per GM.

With the sheer number of mages who are supposed to be running around in Rifts, I'd think you'd be almost guaranteed to have a large amount who are simply irresponsible, and that's probably an avenue for spell proliferation. Joey the Line Walker is drunk again and looking to score. A beautiful woman approaches him and starts chatting him up. They go back to her place, and she asks him what he does (as if the outfit didn't give it away). "Oh, I control the forces of the universe, baby. I'm a wizard." And she says "oh wow, what's your most powerful spell? Can you show me? I'd be very interested..." So of course he spends the next 30 minutes telling her how to cast Sorcerer's Fury, while she nibbles on his ear. And of course, some other wizard (presuming the girl isn't one) is in the next room, watching through a portrait with the eyes cut out. Then they knock the guy out and go through his stuff, looking for scrolls or notes or anything else that might give them more info.

You think that wouldn't happen, but I've seen players do way, waaayyy stupider things than that.


Guilds tend to make crack down on people who give away trade secrets.
I don't see why magic guilds would be any different--it's usually risky to undermine a cartel's lock on a business.

Because there isn't a cartel?


Read up on guilds. They're part cartel, part trade union, part secret society.

In most places there isn't just one magic guild?
Because the various guilds are not a monolithic unified whole?


Neither of those things matter.

Because there is, quite literally, nothing to suggest otherwise other than the word 'guild' that is very quite explicitly NOT the medieval usage of the word since the whole rest of the guild system is explicitly NOT in play?


Nothing other than the meaning of the word, you mean?
Nope.
Pretty much just that.
And the usual stuff that comes up when we go around on this topic.
Wanna rehash it all again...?

The magic 'guilds' in the setting are, at best business clubs.


Sure. Like the Guild of the Gifted--legitimate business men.
;)

If they even exist in a given city (which is not a given). Since they are a word for word copy of the guild material from the PF books it is pretty safe to assume that they are the same as those 'guilds'. Which had no sort of 'lock' on the magic system at all (unless the specific city in question explicitly said they did). And instead existed as social groups to soak PCs of the booty that they get, and provide a way to let the GM feed information and spells to the party.


Guilds by definition exist to oversee the practice of their craft in their region.
The Magic Guilds in Rifts Earth are no exception. They're not all-powerful, but they're depicted as pretty powerful.
They're not depicted as vending-machines for spells and information.

RUE 190
Rivalry between magic guilds and individuals or other guilds/brotherhoods can also lead to gang wars and acts of vengeance.
and
Spell knowledge is power, thus it is guarded jealously by most mages.
Annual Best Poster of the Year Awards (2012)

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

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

Re: Caster availability of spells

Unread post by Killer Cyborg »

TeeAychEeMarchHare wrote:
Killer Cyborg wrote:
Guilds tend to make crack down on people who give away trade secrets.
I don't see why magic guilds would be any different--it's usually risky to undermine a cartel's lock on a business.


This is true. I think it would depend on the guild's outlook on sharing magic (some might be ok with it, some might be deadly serious about the whole thing), and how powerful and widespread the guild is. Seems to me like a group that's a front for the Federation is going to have a slightly different outlook on this than the Happy Hayseeds Magic Guild and Tire Shop in East BFE, South Dakota. :D But as always, that's just my opinion.


Some might be more lax about it, especially with low-level spells, but as a rule, the point of a guild is to consolidate power and trade, not to give it out for free.
Annual Best Poster of the Year Awards (2012)

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

Check out my Author Page on Amazon!
Post Reply

Return to “Rifts®”