Is supernatural PS damaging vampires a new thing?

[Axelmania]

The conversation in the locked Psi-Stalker thread got me wondering about this. I don't want to resurrect the heated argument there about words like "equivalent" or various Juicers (so please nobody mention that so a mod won't nuke the thread) but instead to analyze changes between Rifts Earth's brand of vampires between the original Vampire Kingdoms in 1991 and the Revised version in 2011.

Tetsuya pointed out page 80 of Revised. I'm trying to find the closest equivalents in the original.

Page 37 "Vampires vs Dragons" had...

Dragons are supernatural beings and creatures of magic, consequently, they can inflict damage to vampires through magic or from a punch.

Actually more than punches and magic. Dragon punch/claw inflicted 2d6 HP, and I believe they did 2d6 MD in the original RMB. Kicks do even more damage, which is interesting because RMB lacked any kind of punch/kick damage distinction for dragons, far as I know.

Both the RMB and WB1 I believe preceded the SNPS damage table in the Conversion Book, so any notes about vampires published in later world books (I think they showed up in South America somewhere?) could be relevant.

Interestingly, this may have been more due to their being CoM than supernatural.

"Other creatures of magic are generally considered to be natural enemies of the vampire"

Although it doesn't specify here that other CoM can damage vampires, it seems more suggested in that direction than the other.

The magic breath also interestingly did 1 consistent amount of damage regardless of what it was, even though damage varied widely for hatchlings in RMB.

Pg 33 had "Magic weapons inflict hit point damage rather than mega-damage when used against vampires" which is interesting when you look at the Zavor in the subsequent conversion book... from page 169

Magic weapons .. and magic spell attacks .. inflict no damage and will split the zavor into two identical creatures.

then later down

Physical punches, kicks, claws, bites, and breath attacks from creatures of magic, including the za, loogaroo, sphinx, drakin, unicorn and dragons, will also cause the zavor to split into a duplicate every single time he is struck

This seems to put them on a similar par as magic weapons. We also have 5 other creatures on par with dragons for claws and breath attacks having similar mystical effects.

Even though it doesn't state outright that Drakin/Loogaroo/Sphinx/Unicorns/Za can harm vampires, it would be an understandable house rule to a GM with RMB/VK who acquired CB.

Vampires' ability to harm one another (they are supernatural not CoM) does hint in that direction too, but only for vampires... We did have other examples in the book though:
*173: werejaguars "S.D.C. damage from claws or bite inflicts full damage to the hit points of vampires and other werebeasts" I couldn't find anything about vampires being able to hurt werebeasts in return... so I guess vampires would need silver weapons like anybody to fight back. BTW did anyone notice that GARLIC holds werebeasts at bay? Never noticed that before.

Elsewhere we have other clearly supernatural monsters like the Spider Demon Death Weaver, Dybbuk, Incubus/Succubus, Malignous, Mindolar... all do MD and would probably have supernatural PS in their CB update, but none have any notes about harming vampires. Nor did the gods/Demon Lords earlier in the book.

Is the revised VK the first instance of vampires being depowered so that a broader class of creatures (and not just Dragons/Werebeasts) could hurt them in HTH? Did I miss this change in an earlier book?

I'm wondering if maybe C.J. Carella is to blame for this. I think Nightbane/Guardians could hurt vampires with punches when Nightbane RPG came out in 1995, pg 185's modified Limited Invulnerability section carried to Pg 187 which had "The attacks of supernatural beings like Nightbane and Guardians will do direct and full damage to the vampire's hit points." I'm not sure if that means ALL supernatural beings or just ones "like" these two (Athanatos come to mind). Does anyone know any other creatures explicitly mentioned in examples as able to harm vamps?

This note about "attacks of supernatural beings" was not present on page 24's explanation of Limited Invulnerability in the original WB1.

[Killer Cyborg]

"Supernatural PS" wasn't even a thing until CB1.
So yeah, it being able to damage vampires is new; it wasn't around in the original VK.
Supernatural creatures could damage vampires, though.

[drewkitty ~..~]

It was with VK & is with VKr that the determining factor is that it has to be a SN beings (both true SN & CoM, since before VKr there was no dividing defining between the two) to damage to vamps with open hand attacks. With the addition of supers with the SNPS super ability.

The last phrase in VKr in the section about how the SN&CoM can damage vamps, about CoM with SNPS is talking back to SN beings and those that have the SNPS SA at the top of the section as those with SNPS. Thou they said it with the typical PB typo placement that causes arguments.

That sup's with the SNPS SA can also damage vamps, FAIK is new with VKr.
-----------------
Reading the BTS1 main book about Vamps & Were-Wolves there is only text about how normal people can kill them. Nothing about being able to ignore the others invulnerabilities and hurt each other.

The same it true about were-beasts in the RCB1. Only how they can be hurt by normal humans.
The idea that were-people can be hurt by magic was adding in RWB6: SA page 117, in the were-panther/Jaguar text. This change was confirmed for all were-people in the RDC book.

The idea that vamps and Were-people were combative probably came from the Underworld movie series. But made it's way into the PB worlds through Rifter Article "The Children of the Moon" where it was written in that both could hurt each other.
----------
Vamp vs vamp fighting was talked about in the western Empire book. Later in that text is does say that SN, Com, and immortals can not be turned into vampires.
And finally in the section about magic does it say that attacks from CoM will inflict normal damage. (page 216)
------------
In the Nightspawn MB on page 187 it says that attacks from supernatural beings do full damage to vamps. Using NS (NB) and Guardians as examples of SN beings.

-----
All the texts w/o typos I could find say that it is being a SN beings and/or a Creatures of Magic is what hurt vamps, not this or that PS type.

[Blue_Lion]

As I understand it was a change when they revised vampire kingdom. That means we have a known time for the change.

[The Beast]

The Western Empire book for PFRPG states that attacks by CoM would harm a vampire. It says nothing about SNPS or supernatural creatures. Also in the original WB1 there was a line stating that not all supernatural creatures are CoM, which would suggest that it was possible that some of them could harm a vampire. IMO, it was likely something that the majority of GMs and players house-ruled to allow that Palladium ended up adopting.

"Supernatural PS" wasn't even a thing until CB1.
So yeah, it being able to damage vampires is new; it wasn't around in the original VK.
Supernatural creatures could damage vampires, though.

I only have a 4th printing of the RMB, but SNPS is in there.

[Killer Cyborg]

I only have a 4th printing of the RMB, but SNPS is in there.

Is it?
I'd be surprised.

What IS in the RMB is different lift/carry formulas for supernatural creatures, but that's not the same thing.

[The Beast]

I only have a 4th printing of the RMB, but SNPS is in there.

Is it?
I'd be surprised.

What IS in the RMB is different lift/carry formulas for supernatural creatures, but that's not the same thing.

Well, sort of. If you scroll down a bit on page 9 you see that it states:

Supernatural strong can hurl their max carry weight, blah, blah, blah.

But in all seriousness I was misremembering what that section said. I thought the table said "supernaturally strong can carry PS * 50," not "supernatural creatures can carry PS * 50."

[dreicunan]

It is new with VKr; anyone with Supernatural Strength, regardless of the nature of the creature, now damages vampires in hand to hand combat. Supernatural PS is now the determiner for if a creature inflicts full damage.

I'm guessing this may have influenced the decision to also revise the shadow of the cross to no longer inflict damage.

[Colonel_Tetsuya]

It is new with VKr; anyone with Supernatural Strength, regardless of the nature of the creature, now damages vampires in hand to hand combat. Supernatural PS is now the determiner for if a creature inflicts full damage.

I'm guessing this may have influenced the decision to also revise the shadow of the cross to no longer inflict damage.

I wouldn't actually say its "new", merely that the outright statement is new.

Remember that when Vampires were first given statistics, "Supernatural Strength" didn't even exist, but the section in VK(nr) about Dragons vs Vampires clearly intimates that other supernatural beings or things with what would become supernatural strength were intended to hurt them (which is why Werebeasts hurt them). It was unlikely Kevin EVER considered that there would be sources of supernatural strength that didnt make you into a supernatural being.

[dreicunan]

It is new with VKr; anyone with Supernatural Strength, regardless of the nature of the creature, now damages vampires in hand to hand combat. Supernatural PS is now the determiner for if a creature inflicts full damage.

I'm guessing this may have influenced the decision to also revise the shadow of the cross to no longer inflict damage.

I wouldn't actually say its "new", merely that the outright statement is new.

Remember that when Vampires were first given statistics, "Supernatural Strength" didn't even exist, but the section in VK(nr) about Dragons vs Vampires clearly intimates that other supernatural beings or things with what would become supernatural strength were intended to hurt them (which is why Werebeasts hurt them). It was unlikely Kevin EVER considered that there would be sources of supernatural strength that didnt make you into a supernatural being.

Fair points; however, he must have considered supernatural strength from a non-supernatural source by the time CB1 was published, as the Extraordinary Strength power at that time granted supernatural strength in Rifts, and plenty of characters with that power would have had it through non-supernatural means.

[Colonel_Tetsuya]

It is new with VKr; anyone with Supernatural Strength, regardless of the nature of the creature, now damages vampires in hand to hand combat. Supernatural PS is now the determiner for if a creature inflicts full damage.

I'm guessing this may have influenced the decision to also revise the shadow of the cross to no longer inflict damage.

I wouldn't actually say its "new", merely that the outright statement is new.

Remember that when Vampires were first given statistics, "Supernatural Strength" didn't even exist, but the section in VK(nr) about Dragons vs Vampires clearly intimates that other supernatural beings or things with what would become supernatural strength were intended to hurt them (which is why Werebeasts hurt them). It was unlikely Kevin EVER considered that there would be sources of supernatural strength that didnt make you into a supernatural being.

Fair points; however, he must have considered supernatural strength from a non-supernatural source by the time CB1 was published, as the Extraordinary Strength power at that time granted supernatural strength in Rifts, and plenty of characters with that power would have had it through non-supernatural means.

Actually, most Supers were supernatural creatures. The only two Rifts-canon Supers (in Mercenaries) are both MDC beings and considered supernatural creatures.

Remember that the reason for those Super Powers granting MDC in Rifts when they normally do not is that they are enhanced/altered by the super-PPE heavy environment. Basically... boosted by magic.

Like i said, the outright statement is most definitely new, as even as late as Arzno, the books simply refer you to VK(nr) for stats. But id argue that the intention was always there.

[Killer Cyborg]

It is new with VKr; anyone with Supernatural Strength, regardless of the nature of the creature, now damages vampires in hand to hand combat. Supernatural PS is now the determiner for if a creature inflicts full damage.

I'm guessing this may have influenced the decision to also revise the shadow of the cross to no longer inflict damage.

I wouldn't actually say its "new", merely that the outright statement is new.

Remember that when Vampires were first given statistics, "Supernatural Strength" didn't even exist, but the section in VK(nr) about Dragons vs Vampires clearly intimates that other supernatural beings or things with what would become supernatural strength were intended to hurt them (which is why Werebeasts hurt them). It was unlikely Kevin EVER considered that there would be sources of supernatural strength that didnt make you into a supernatural being.

Since "supernatural strength" didn't even exist, it's unlikely that Kevin considered it at all.
More likely, he considered the supernatural nature of supernatural creatures to mystically overcome the general invulnerability to vampires.
I don't think he would have brought strength into the conversation at all.
That evolved later, after they changed the rules to factor strength into supernatural melee damage, then used the new "Supernatural Strength" as a handy tool to express "anybody really, really strong."

[drewkitty ~..~]

SNPS as it was originally in the PB system was a PS with a score over 18. There were no special bonuses other then actually getting what is now the "normal PS damage bonus".

[Killer Cyborg]

SNPS as it was originally in the PB system was a PS with a score over 18. There were no special bonuses other then actually getting what is now the "normal PS damage bonus".

I find that citations and quotes help people know what I'm talking about.

[drewkitty ~..~]

The problem with that is that PF1 just gives SN/CoM beings more dice to roll w/o explicitly saying "their str is SN".*shrugs*
no need to try to argue about this. It does not really matter.

If there was an origin of the SNPS as it is today you should look in the HU 1st ed books. (original and revised)
In revised page 9 for the basic str text & page 165 for EX PS. As the core ideas that what the current formatted SNPS grew out of.
The text in the RMB uses similer wording are the HU1r book when talking about a char with greater then normal str.

Which is why the original RCB1 wording was the way it was when talking about "converting" chars & monsters from SDC settings.

[Blue_Lion]

SNPS as it was originally in the PB system was a PS with a score over 18. There were no special bonuses other then actually getting what is now the "normal PS damage bonus".

I find that citations and quotes help people know what I'm talking about.

The only thing I see that gives a normal human SNPS in Rifts rpg is-
Rifts RPG PG 175 spell Superhuman Strength says gives the charter a supernatural PS of 30.

Drewkitty appears to be miss understanding what the book means when it says book in context.

Rifts RPG PG 9 says Supernatural creatures including dragons are even stronger than humans. Creatures with a PS of 18 or higher can carry 50 times their PS.

-He is reading that in a vacuum as a statement that a score over 18 was SNPS, however if you read the entry right before it you can see that it is untrue.

Strong charters, with a P.S. of 17 or higher, can lift 20 times their P.S. in pounds. this means a charter with a P.S. 18 can carry 360 pounds(162kg).

So given the reference of the statement right before the one talking about SN creatures having a PS of 18 or higher does not give you a SNPS.

[Killer Cyborg]

SNPS as it was originally in the PB system was a PS with a score over 18. There were no special bonuses other then actually getting what is now the "normal PS damage bonus".

I find that citations and quotes help people know what I'm talking about.

The only thing I see that gives a normal human SNPS in Rifts rpg is-
Rifts RPG PG 175 spell Superhuman Strength says gives the charter a supernatural PS of 30.

Hm.
What printing are you looking at?
I have 2nd printing, and it doesn't mention anything being supernatural.

[Blue_Lion]

SNPS as it was originally in the PB system was a PS with a score over 18. There were no special bonuses other then actually getting what is now the "normal PS damage bonus".

I find that citations and quotes help people know what I'm talking about.

The only thing I see that gives a normal human SNPS in Rifts rpg is-
Rifts RPG PG 175 spell Superhuman Strength says gives the charter a supernatural PS of 30.

Hm.
What printing are you looking at?
I have 2nd printing, and it doesn't mention anything being supernatural.

Rifts rpg 10th printing January 1997 PG 175.

Superhuman strength- This incantation magically gives the charter a supernatural P.S. of 30 and ...

The italics are in the book, so emphasis was theirs.

[drewkitty ~..~]

From the RMB hard cover, 1995.

"The incantation magic increases the character's physical strength (P.S.) to 30 and physical endurance (P.E.) to 24 and adds 30 S.D.C. for the duration of the magic."

Which means there was a silent update at sometime after 95.

[eliakon]

SNPS as it was originally in the PB system was a PS with a score over 18. There were no special bonuses other then actually getting what is now the "normal PS damage bonus".

I find that citations and quotes help people know what I'm talking about.

The only thing I see that gives a normal human SNPS in Rifts rpg is-
Rifts RPG PG 175 spell Superhuman Strength says gives the charter a supernatural PS of 30.

Drewkitty appears to be miss understanding what the book means when it says book in context.

Rifts RPG PG 9 says Supernatural creatures including dragons are even stronger than humans. Creatures with a PS of 18 or higher can carry 50 times their PS.

-He is reading that in a vacuum as a statement that a score over 18 was SNPS, however if you read the entry right before it you can see that it is untrue.

Strong charters, with a P.S. of 17 or higher, can lift 20 times their P.S. in pounds. this means a charter with a P.S. 18 can carry 360 pounds(162kg).

So given the reference of the statement right before the one talking about SN creatures having a PS of 18 or higher does not give you a SNPS.

This is even more obvious if one looks at... every other game that predates Rifts and looks at their strength rules and notes that none of them discuss supernatural creatures in the PS at all so its exquisitely clear that PS 18 was never supernatural before this line and thus the chances that Rifts was suddenly changing every normal mundane person who rolled an 18 into a supernatural creature seem... remote.

[Prysus]

Greetings and Salutations. I found this old post of mine discussing Vampires and Supernatural Strength. This was made on March 17, 2011. As I can tell of that date, there had been no official rules that Supernatural Strength, or even Supernatural Beings in general, could hurt Vampires unless it was stated in the race's write-up.

Side note: Werebeasts were able to harm Vampires (at least Werejaguars) since VK (original). However, Werebeasts, which were given full write-ups as of Rifts Conversion Book One (where SNPS was also introduced) didn't receive Supernatural Strength (from what I can tell) until Rifts Dark Conversion (they didn't have it in RCB1).

Hope this helps. Farewell and safe journeys for now.

viewtopic.php?f=5&t=119784&p=2334468

Spoiler:

Drewkitty:
My statement is in direct response to your's, and so it should be read as such. or do you mean like this?
KW, They do MD a.k.a. Megadamage. I think you have heard of it. It is the type of damage that is done to MDC stuff.
Don't rightly know if it is because they have SNPS or 'just because'. (and it is late so I don't want to look it up right now.)

Vampires inflicted a preset M.D. damage in VK because Palladium hadn't started Supernatural P.S. yet. Even dragons just had set M.D. with claws and such (regardless of their P.S. score). This will likely change in the Expanded & Revised.

As for why Vampires could damage each other, this is listed as being part of their "strange nature." No other explanation is given, so you have to figure just some mystery no one understands (at least from that write-up alone).

wouldn't it have been easier to scale the damage capacity of the vampires up instead limiting everyone else and raising these annoying questions. But the description of dragons is contradictory, but it does say that BECAUSE dragons are supernatural and creatures of magic that they can hurt vamps. but they pretty much stop there and don't bother giving us the rest of the megaversal conversions. so yes werewolves can hurt vampires, but since they aren't covered in VK

For some history, in the Rifts main book, Dragons are listed as supernatural beings (as per R:UE this is retconned). In Vampire Kingdoms, they go out of their way to add they're also "creatures of magic" (this was NOT mentioned anywhere in the original Rifts main book) and can damage vampires. The book also states that "creatures of magic" are natural enemies of vampires. Vampires are also vulnerable to magic.

In Western Empire (for PF), the fact Creatures of Magic hurt them is also listed (under their magic weakness). This is clearly stated.

On a Gateway to the Megaverse podcast Kevin actually goes so far to state that supernatural beings can damage vampires in general. Though this was only in one of his podcast interviews and never stated in any book.

but in the conversion book it says tha all SDC damage from claws do full damage to vamps. A restrained claw does 4d6+PS SDC but a power claw (1 action) will do 1d6 MD. so does that mean that a restrained punch can hurt but a power claw doesn't? or does that mean in one attack a werewolf can take out 2 vamps (if we are converting 1:100) or 600 (if we are saing that an MDC attwill completely destroy any sdc object-of course assuming the unlikely event that the ww can hit 600 in a single blow)

Admittedly, M.D. really messes up the concept. The basic rule is that anything that damages will inflict H.P. damage only. If the attack is M.D. in nature, then it will still do only H.P. damage on a 1:1 scale. So 1D6 M.D. inflicts 1D6 H.P. to a vampire. There are a few examples of this throughout the VK book, but I can't find a general ruling. As I said, with so many races inflicting M.D. it mucks up the ruling (because then a restrained punch is MORE effective than a full strength punch which just makes no sense). But, in general, that is the ruling.

For werejaguars, their damage rating is identical to vampires. So I'd go so far as to rule that the restrained/full/power punch damage to a vampire would be the same as vampire vs. vampire (found in the vampire section), but there is no official ruling on that. Again, in Mega-Damage settings this is pretty muddled. Hopefully Revised & Expanded will clean this up, but that is no guarantee.

In Palladium Fantasy, this is much more clean cut. There is no M.D. to worry about, so S.D.C./H.P. damage that hurts a vampire just does H.P. damage, end of story. Clean and simple.

Also in Palladium Fantasy werebeasts (this includes werewolves and others) are Creatures of Magic. Since creatures of magic can hurt vampires (due to a vulnerability to magic) this makes it very clean and simple again.

Anyways, that's all for now. Hopefully that cleans some of this up. Reading the sections first will help clean up some questions. Thank you for your time and patience, please have a nice day. Farewell and safe journeys for now.

[The Beast]

[justify]Greetings and Salutations. I found this old post of mine discussing Vampires and Supernatural Strength. This was made on March 17, 2011. As I can tell of that date, there had been no official rules that Supernatural Strength, or even Supernatural Beings in general, could hurt Vampires unless it was stated in the race's write-up.

Well following that link TechnoGothic, in the last post, pointed out that in Nightbane SNPS does damage vampires. I would look up the page and post it here, but honestly, the only things I feel like doing right now is reading the latest entries at notalwaysright.com and then playing some Elite Dangerous.

[Prysus]

Well following that link TechnoGothic, in the last post, pointed out that in Nightbane SNPS does damage vampires. I would look up the page and post it here, but honestly, the only things I feel like doing right now is reading the latest entries at notalwaysright.com and then playing some Elite Dangerous.

Greetings and Salutations. Huh ... can't believe I missed that. Anyways, to address what Nightbane actually says (not sure where he thought it's written in HU) ...

Note: The attacks of supernatural beings like Nightbane and Guardians will do direct and full damage to the vampire's hit points.

Which means Supernatural Beings can damage vampires (so I had been wrong about that part), but it does not state that anyone/anything with Supernatural P.S. can damage vampires (though I think in Nightbane everything with SNPS was also a supernatural being, I could be wrong). So if someone can find a different quote that's inclusive to SNPS in its entirety, I'll willingly admit I was wrong again. Farewell and safe journeys for now.

[Blue_Lion]

From the RMB hard cover, 1995.

"The incantation magic increases the character's physical strength (P.S.) to 30 and physical endurance (P.E.) to 24 and adds 30 S.D.C. for the duration of the magic."

Which means there was a silent update at sometime after 95.

A change between editions, judging by the date I am willing to bet the change happened jan 1997, when 10 editions was printed probably less than 2 years after yours.

[drewkitty ~..~]

Well following that link TechnoGothic, in the last post, pointed out that in Nightbane SNPS does damage vampires. I would look up the page and post it here, but honestly, the only things I feel like doing right now is reading the latest entries at notalwaysright.com and then playing some Elite Dangerous.

Greetings and Salutations. Huh ... can't believe I missed that. Anyways, to address what Nightbane actually says (not sure where he thought it's written in HU) ...

Note: The attacks of supernatural beings like Nightbane and Guardians will do direct and full damage to the vampire's hit points.

Which means Supernatural Beings can damage vampires (so I had been wrong about that part), but it does not state that anyone/anything with Supernatural P.S. can damage vampires (though I think in Nightbane everything with SNPS was also a supernatural being, I could be wrong). So if someone can find a different quote that's inclusive to SNPS in its entirety, I'll willingly admit I was wrong again. Farewell and safe journeys for now.

Gee...I think someone else posted early in this topic something to the effect that in NB that it is the SN of the being that is the reason the NB and Gs can damage vamps......I wonder who....? *sarcasm*
And that in every setting outside of rifts with traditional vamps in them it is that the SN or CoM'ness of the being that is what is the reason why they can damage vamps with open hand attacks.

[Colonel_Tetsuya]

Well following that link TechnoGothic, in the last post, pointed out that in Nightbane SNPS does damage vampires. I would look up the page and post it here, but honestly, the only things I feel like doing right now is reading the latest entries at notalwaysright.com and then playing some Elite Dangerous.

Greetings and Salutations. Huh ... can't believe I missed that. Anyways, to address what Nightbane actually says (not sure where he thought it's written in HU) ...

Note: The attacks of supernatural beings like Nightbane and Guardians will do direct and full damage to the vampire's hit points.

Which means Supernatural Beings can damage vampires (so I had been wrong about that part), but it does not state that anyone/anything with Supernatural P.S. can damage vampires (though I think in Nightbane everything with SNPS was also a supernatural being, I could be wrong). So if someone can find a different quote that's inclusive to SNPS in its entirety, I'll willingly admit I was wrong again. Farewell and safe journeys for now.

Just keep in mind that Nightbane != Rifts; what obtains in one game does not neccessarily apply to the other, but it is in line with where things appear to have been going even in Rifts at the time.

[Killer Cyborg]

Well following that link TechnoGothic, in the last post, pointed out that in Nightbane SNPS does damage vampires. I would look up the page and post it here, but honestly, the only things I feel like doing right now is reading the latest entries at notalwaysright.com and then playing some Elite Dangerous.

Greetings and Salutations. Huh ... can't believe I missed that. Anyways, to address what Nightbane actually says (not sure where he thought it's written in HU) ...

Note: The attacks of supernatural beings like Nightbane and Guardians will do direct and full damage to the vampire's hit points.

Which means Supernatural Beings can damage vampires (so I had been wrong about that part), but it does not state that anyone/anything with Supernatural P.S. can damage vampires (though I think in Nightbane everything with SNPS was also a supernatural being, I could be wrong). So if someone can find a different quote that's inclusive to SNPS in its entirety, I'll willingly admit I was wrong again. Farewell and safe journeys for now.

Gee...I think someone else posted early in this topic something to the effect that in NB that it is the SN of the being that is the reason the NB and Gs can damage vamps......I wonder who....? *sarcasm*
And that in every setting outside of rifts with traditional vamps in them it is that the SN or CoM'ness of the being that is what is the reason why they can damage vamps with open hand attacks.

Sure.
And how many of those settings have a book as recent as the revised Vampire Kingdoms book?

[drewkitty ~..~]

Like with ALL the canon rules, the canon for each setting is set forth in that setting's books, and no where else.
.....Generally speaking....no new/old argument about this here. If you want to argue about this do it in a new topic in the GM forum.

I was agreeing with Prysus that The Beast's understand is wrong, and immplying that is The Beast had actually read my 1st post to this topic he would not of made such a embarrassing mistake. Yes I was disappointed that someone didn't read what I posted earlier. My feet are on the floor where they should be.

Yes, rules can be imported via GM choice, that does not make them canon for the setting they were imported to, and the rules from the other settings can be used to compare to see if a something new is 'not stupid.'

Since you all know I find your interpretation of what the last phrase means is misaligned with what it really means. Do I need to say it all over again? No, I do not so I won't.
Since you won't change, and you won't change me, we can drop it before it before it starts. There argument is at the end and done before it is started.

[Killer Cyborg]

Like with ALL the canon rules, the canon for each setting is set forth in that setting's books, and no where else.

Spiffy.
Want to answer the question that I actually asked?

[drewkitty ~..~]

Like with ALL the canon rules, the canon for each setting is set forth in that setting's books, and no where else.

Spiffy.
Want to answer the question that I actually asked?

You asked for it....
And still going for the most potent counter argument before you can get to your argument.

What I did was even more potent so you couldn't use the answer to say that Rifts canon takes president over every other canon. And since the answer to that question has already been said in this topic it, asking it now showed intent to use the answer to assert that the ""newest"" is ""right for all"" even if the 'newest' is a <adjective> misinterpretation of canon text that runs counter to the canon rules in ALL the other settings with undead vamps.

--
There are two options logically when considering as a whole the last paragraph in the text VKr text that is being argued about. Ether it means that <1> that all beings with SNPS are now CoM even if they are not specifically stated to be in their race/class text, or <2> the the phrase "..., just like anyone else with Supernatural PS." is referring back to SN beings and sup with the SNPS SA at top top of the section & was just poorly written so was poorly understood.

So, are you empowering a host of mortals into CoM or did you misunderstand the wording of the text?

Remember that the TJ text specifically says that they are Not Supernatural...which at the time the text was written included the CoM with in the meaning.

[Killer Cyborg]

Like with ALL the canon rules, the canon for each setting is set forth in that setting's books, and no where else.

Spiffy.
Want to answer the question that I actually asked?

What I did was even more potent so you couldn't use the answer to say that Rifts canon takes president over every other canon.

Good thing I wasn't going to say that.

And since the answer to that question has already been said in this topic

Really?
Where?

asking it now showed intent to use the answer to assert that the "newest' the what is right for all' even if the newest is a <adjective> misinterpretation of canon text that runs counter to the canon rules in ALL the other settings with undead vamps.

Nope.
When Palladium introduces a rule or rule change in one setting, it doesn't necessarily carry over into the rest of the settings.
So it would be incorrect to assume that just because a rule (or change) is introduced into Rifts, that the rule necessarily applies to all the other settings.
The point is, it's just as incorrect to assume the opposite--that a rule does NOT carry over into the other settings.

What we end up with is a Schrodinger's Box situation, where we don't know whether this kind of change is or is not representative in a change in any particular setting until that setting addresses it.

If the revised VK book is newer (and from your dancing and dodging, I'm going to assume that it IS) than any vampire books in other settings, then we don't know whether or not the Rifts rule is intended to apply to more than just Rifts.

There are two options logically when considering as a whole the last line in the text VKr text that is being argued about. Ether it means that <1> that all beings with SNPS are now CoM even if they are not specifically stated to be in their race/class text, or <2> the the phrase "..., just like anyone else with Supernatural PS." is referring back to SN beings and sup with the SNPS SA at top top of the section.

So, are you empowering a host of mortals into CoM or did you misunderstand the wording of the text?

False dilemma.
I understand the wording of the text.
Being a CoM is irrelevant to whether or not Supernatural PS damages vampires in the Rifts setting.
Whether or not this applies to other settings is currently unknown.

[drewkitty ~..~]

If you were not going to assert that then there are others that would. And have done in the past.

Since CoM's magical in nature that lets them damage undead vamps the text about equaling the CoM SNPS to that of SN beings and sups with the SNPS SA. IF this is not true then the text is saying that those with SNPS are in somehow magical in nature. Which is another way of saying they are CoM. So the choice is there, in the reading.

Taking the last phrase in isolation is taking it out of context.

[Killer Cyborg]

If you were not going to assert that then there are others that would. And have done in the past.

Spiffy.
But when I ask a question, I'd prefer an answer to the question that I ask, instead of seeing a counter-argument to something that somebody else may have said in the past, and that you think might be said in the future.
It's hard to hold a conversation when the other party ignores what's being said in favor of arguing with other people who may or may not be there.

Since CoM's magical in nature that lets them damage undead vamps the text about equaling the CoM SNPS to that of SN beings and sups with the SNPS SA.

It sounds like you're saying that because CoM's supernatural nature allows them to damage vampires,
that Supernatural PS cannot also be something that allows people to damage vampires.
Which is kind of like arguing that because silver damages vampires, Supernatural PS only damages vampires if it's made of silver.

[Prysus]

There are two options logically when considering as a whole the last paragraph in the text VKr text that is being argued about. Ether it means that <1> that all beings with SNPS are now CoM even if they are not specifically stated to be in their race/class text, or <2> the the phrase "..., just like anyone else with Supernatural PS." is referring back to SN beings and sup with the SNPS SA at top top of the section & was just poorly written so was poorly understood.

So, are you empowering a host of mortals into CoM or did you misunderstand the wording of the text?.

Greetings and Salutations. Wow ... just ... wow. Okay, I feel the need to address your "logic."

1: "that all beings with SNPS are now CoM even if they are not specifically stated to be in their race/class text ..."

I'm not sure how you came to that odd conclusion, as it's almost exactly the opposite of what the text actually says. What the text tells us is that CoM can damage vampires due to their magical nature and inflict half damage normally. If they have SNPS, then they do damage "like anyone else with Supernatural P.S." That tells us that CoM can damage vampires regardless (but with different values). Then it compares CoM to OTHERS with SNPS, not the other way around. You seemed to have gotten that mixed up.

So using that same "logic" as above, it would mean that the text could mean that CoM with SNPS either becomes a Supernatural Being or they're transformed into a "mortal" with SNPS. The former is flat-out contradicted by RUE and the latter is silly, in my opinion.

2: "the the phrase "..., just like anyone else with Supernatural PS." is referring back to SN beings and sup with the SNPS SA at top top of the section & was just poorly written so was poorly understood."

Well, since that's not what the sentence actually says, it would be hard to read it that way. You're reading "anyone" as only certain groups, while we're reading "anyone" as "anyone," because that's what the text says. We can guess that's not what "anyone" meant, and that "anyone" really meant only limited other options, but that's an assumption (not an actual statement within the books).

This is also predicated upon the stance that "mortal beings with the super ability of Supernatural P.S." means "super powers only," though that in itself is not clear and requires conclusions to be drawn. Furthermore, I'd take the stance that it's an illogical conclusion. A character using chemicals and gains Supernatural P.S. can harm vampires, unless you're a character that's using chemicals and gains Supernatural P.S. Note: Not all Super Powers are gained through chemicals, but some are. Which means the logic is that chemicals and science can hurt vampires, but only if they originate in the HU universe, because chemicals and science in Rifts can't. Possible, but I don't find likely.

Anyways, that's all for now. Farewell and safe journeys for now.



Edit:: Personally, I don't like that anyone with Supernatural P.S. can damage a vampire. I think it's silly. I also understand, from a game mechanics standpoint, that it's a simple distinguishing factor that can help a game run smoothly instead of getting into silly debates over what does and does not qualify (such as what qualifies as a Supernatural Being, as many of the books have contradicting information on this, why does a chemically empowered superhero hurt vampires but a chemically empowered juicer doesn't other than "because," etc.).

[Killer Cyborg]

Edit:: Personally, I don't like that anyone with Supernatural P.S. can damage a vampire. I think it's silly.

Same.

[The Beast]

I don't like that mortals can get SNPS. It should be restricted to supernatural beings and CoM.

[guardiandashi]

what mortals can gain supernatural ps, is the first question that IMO needs to be looked at and how did they get it?

for instance, if you look at lone star, there is the mutations gone wrong table, (that dog boys are not supposed to roll on, but they could if the gm so decides, that has a chance of giving a genetically engineered creature supernatural strength, (with a pretty good chance of them having supernatural PE as well. )

I believe the titan juicer gets it also, most of the other classes that can get it get it from "magic" if I remember right.

now I would argue that the titan juicer is an outlier, and you could make an argument that their supernatural ps isn't quite the same as any other source but that would be nitpicking and setting up additional conditions on abilities that are not in the books.

[Killer Cyborg]

I don't like that mortals can get SNPS. It should be restricted to supernatural beings and CoM.

Yup.

[13eowulf]

what mortals can gain supernatural ps, is the first question that IMO needs to be looked at and how did they get it?

Some are born with it. There is a blurb in the front of D-Bees of North America that D-Bees are explicitly neither SN beings nor CoM (Page 7, right hand column, first full paragrah, for the record). That makes every D-Bee with SNPS in that book a mortal with SNPS. Lanatour Hunters and the Grackle Tooth for example.

As of Rifter 50 (an official Article) any Biotic or Host Armor from Splicers can be upgraded to SNPS, so if they came to Rifts they would have SNPS if so upgraded. And they didnt rename SNPS like ATB did, it is still called SNPS there.

[Colonel_Tetsuya]

Edit:: Personally, I don't like that anyone with Supernatural P.S. can damage a vampire. I think it's silly.

Same.

Thirded. Wasnt ever saying i agreed with it, just that it was stated that way.

If i was going to house rule it, youd need to be a supernatural creature or creature of magic to harm vampires, not just have supernatural strength. Vampires are already laughably easy to kill.

[Axelmania]

Folks I hope we don't focus too much on the 'supernatural' aspect here. A better title might have been "how has what can harm vampires expanded over time?" in regards to the intent here.

Supernatural creatures could damage vampires, though.

Do you know any other mentions aside from notes about other vampires, werejaguar and dragons in WB1?

Reading the BTS1 main book about Vamps & Were-Wolves there is only text about how normal people can kill them. Nothing about being able to ignore the others invulnerabilities and hurt each other.

Hadn't thought to look there. Trying to recall if they had invulnerabilities in PRPG monster section.

The same it true about were-beasts in the RCB1. Only how they can be hurt by normal humans.
The idea that were-people can be hurt by magic was adding in RWB6: SA page 117, in the were-panther/Jaguar text. This change was confirmed for all were-people in the RDC book.

Kinda sad they became more vulnerable, nice for them to lack a vampire's vulnerability.

The idea that vamps and Were-people were combative probably came from the Underworld movie series. But made it's way into the PB worlds through Rifter Article "The Children of the Moon" where it was written in that both could hurt each other.

Underworld was Sept 2003, Rifter 4 was Oct 1998.

Maybe Kev got a complaint from vampire-loving GMs about werewolf PCs annihilating vampires since weres could hurt vamps but not vice versa?

In the Nightspawn MB on page 187 it says that attacks from supernatural beings do full damage to vamps. Using NS (NB) and Guardians as examples of SN beings.

I brought this up in my OP, "S beings like N and G" isn't necessarily "all S beings" though. Possibly leaving GM flexibility to judge what other S beings were "like" those two.

Hounds and Wampyrs have SNPS. Makes me also wonder this "attacks from" if that refers to unarmed or if it would apply to attacks with weapons too, since Hounds generally wield Darkblades.

As I understand it was a change when they revised vampire kingdom. That means we have a known time for the change.

There were a progression of changes, starting with Nightbane and continguing with VK revised. I'm wondering if there are other steps along the way, to fill in gaps.

The Western Empire book for PFRPG states that attacks by CoM would harm a vampire.

Anyone know page for this? I'm hoping we can put up a timeline here of introduction of these concepts. Did this precede Nightbane?

[The Beast]

The Western Empire book for PFRPG states that attacks by CoM would harm a vampire.

Anyone know page for this? I'm hoping we can put up a timeline here of introduction of these concepts. Did this precede Nightbane?

It's on page 216 under the Magic bullet.

As for the date, Nightbane has it beat by three years.

[drewkitty ~..~]

The same it true about were-beasts in the RCB1. Only how they can be hurt by normal humans.
The idea that were-people can be hurt by magic was adding in RWB6: SA page 117, in the were-panther/Jaguar text. This change was confirmed for all were-people in the RDC book.

Kinda sad they became more vulnerable, nice for them to lack a vampire's vulnerability.

The idea that vamps and Were-people were combative probably came from the Underworld movie series. But made it's way into the PB worlds through Rifter Article "The Children of the Moon" where it was written in that both could hurt each other.

Underworld was Sept 2003, Rifter 4 was Oct 1998.

Maybe Kev got a complaint from vampire-loving GMs about werewolf PCs annihilating vampires since weres could hurt vamps but not vice versa?

In the Nightspawn MB on page 187 it says that attacks from supernatural beings do full damage to vamps. Using NS (NB) and Guardians as examples of SN beings.

I brought this up in my OP, "S beings like N and G" isn't necessarily "all S beings" though. Possibly leaving GM flexibility to judge what other S beings were "like" those two.

Hounds and Wampyrs have SNPS. Makes me also wonder this "attacks from" if that refers to unarmed or if it would apply to attacks with weapons too, since Hounds generally wield Darkblades.

The Western Empire book for PFRPG states that attacks by CoM would harm a vampire.

Anyone know page for this? I'm hoping we can put up a timeline here of introduction of these concepts. Did this precede Nightbane?

There was no change in the were-creature's invulnerability. Was listing what was there.

Both are over a decade in the past, so ...'whatever' *shrugs*

Just not skipping over things in listing them.

Hounds and Hunters: In the NB setting ...nope that SNPS is not enough. Because they are magical golems....that would fall under magic hurting vamps. Darkblades are magic weapons.
Wyampires.....In the NB setting the is nothing in the text that says they are SN. As that they are not in the RDC I would presume ether no change from the NB text or that they are unique to the NB setting.
--

----------
Vamp vs vamp fighting was talked about in the western Empire book. Later in that text is does say that SN, Com, and immortals can not be turned into vampires.
And finally in the section about magic does it say that attacks from CoM will inflict normal damage. (page 216)
------------

--
Nightspawn MB 1995
PF2 western emp 1998
_________________________________
The last phrase in the text being discussed is the worst bit of writing in a PB book since the the 'rocket mortar' in RBM was called a 'rocket propelled mortar'.

note: a 'rocket mortar' shoots rockets, a 'rocket propelled mortar' is a mortar that moves around by rockets.

[Axelmania]

Interesting thing about Nightbane 185/187 is "magic spells and charmed weapons will also inflict damage, but spell
magic does only half damage" doesn't seem to cover all magic weapons, just ones enchanted with the Charm Weapon rituals.

[drewkitty ~..~]

Interesting thing about Nightbane 185/187 is "magic spells and charmed weapons will also inflict damage, but spell
magic does only half damage" doesn't seem to cover all magic weapons, just ones enchanted with the Charm Weapon rituals.

Those created by the Charm Weapon rituals are the only magic weapons detailed in the NS/NB MB. So it is not suprising that the writer would write about what he wrote into the book as the examples in his writings, instead of what was not in the book. Sort of like how he use the NSs/NBs and Gs as examples for what is SN beings.

[Axelmania]

Huh... I figured Darkblades but cannot actually find any indication of them being magic weapons in the main book, maybe this was added later?

Wampyrs and other Vampires would have been valuable mentions, also being supernatural beings. Or Night Princes.

[drewkitty ~..~]

Nightlands page 76-78 (bottom/top).

"The metal is "inclined" to receive and hold magic energy which makes all darkblades nearly indestructible and equivalent to a lesser magic weapon."

[Axelmania]

Makes me wonder if Carella snuck that in due to complaints about vampires annihilating hounds or something. Although, not being magic weapons could help explain vampires being such a serious problem to the nightlords. You'd have to have hounds carry wooden weapons and I'm not sure how intelligent hounds are in terms of knowing what weapons to use, might need a hound master to direct them for stuff like that.

[drewkitty ~..~]

The text looks more like people were asking for more options different styles of swords other then sabers and an expansion of what darkblades are & how they are made.

There was no "sneaking", the location is listed in the quick-find list.

[Axelmania]

Darkblades gaining a new property not previously mentioned is kinda sneaky, and I doubt "NOW MAGIC" was in the ToC.