using MD weapons to parry SDC punches from SDC beings

[Axelmania]

Does anyone have any examples in the book where this causes damage to the unarmored squishy MDC attacker?

People seem to be assuming this is true, and it makes some level of sense, but reading how combat works I can't recall any text to support this whole 'getting a free damage roll' idea.

I don't mean MDC weapons which inflict SDC like Neural Maces, I mean "I'm using a vibro-knife to parry your naked punch" or "I'm using a psi-sword to parry your barefooted kick".

[Blue_Lion]

only time they talk about damage is when you block with a shield. I know of no where the books say you take damage if they parry. (while it might seam logical it also seams exploitive.)

[dreicunan]

If you try to parry an MD weapon attack barehanded you take the usual damage from the weapon. You have to try and parry the arm of the wielder, not the weapon, to have a chance (RUE p. 340).

Doesn't take too much to extrapolate that the reverse would be true, but it would depend on the weapon. An energy weapon like a psi-sword (in whatever shape it might be) or a Plasma sword would inflict damage, because the nature of those weapons is such that touching means taking damage. A physical weapon, however, would be able to be used in such a way that it wouldn't necessarily be causing much if any damage (parry with the flat of a sword, for example).

Personally, if the person parrying wanted to minimize damage to or avoid damaging the attacker, I'd either make them roll to pull punch or they'd have to beat the attack roll by 5 to do no damage.

[Khanibal]

On a parry, no. You're directing the force off to the side. On a straight block, then yes. I'd say 1/2 the punch damage unless the blocker has SN strength, then full damage.

[dreicunan]

On a parry, no. You're directing the force off to the side. On a straight block, then yes. I'd say 1/2 the punch damage unless the blocker has SN strength, then full damage.

Palladium defines a parry as a block (see page 340 and 346 of RUE), and near as I can tell always has across the various megaversal systems.

[Colonel_Tetsuya]

You dont parry with the edges of edged weapons, though. Ever. Thats part of the basic principle you would learn when learning a WP, and, quite honestly, even without one - bladed weapons are almost universally indexed so you hold them edge on and even your instinct untrained is to parry/block lateraly.

Youre not going to damage anyone parrying, unless the weapon itself would make it do damage (the previously mentioned plasma or flaming swords, which mere contact with would cause harm). MAYBE if you were parrying with your forearm vs their attacks and had one of those vibro-spike armors. Maybe. I just dont see he need to complicate the rules. Parries dont inflict damage as far as the rules are concerned, unless the item in question has a special rule attached (im actually not aware of any but they may exist), so no matter how “realistic” it might be... just stick the rules. System is deadly enouh as it is.

[The Beast]

Does anyone have any examples in the book where this causes damage to the unarmored squishy MDC attacker?

People seem to be assuming this is true, and it makes some level of sense, but reading how combat works I can't recall any text to support this whole 'getting a free damage roll' idea.

I don't mean MDC weapons which inflict SDC like Neural Maces, I mean "I'm using a vibro-knife to parry your naked punch" or "I'm using a psi-sword to parry your barefooted kick".

That's because you're looking for a rule that states that instead of looking at how the weapon operates. Going with your example above, Palladium states that vibro-blades operate by surrounding the blade with an invisible high-frequency energy field that gives them MD capabilities. People naturally take that to mean that it is the field that causes the damage, so if you were to touch it with your bare hand it would damage your hand. If you need a cinematic approach for how to look at this, picture fighting Vader. He swings his lightsaber at you. Are you going to attempt to block or redirect his blade with your arm or hand?

Having said that, if your GM is using the combat ranges from N&Sr then I can see it being plausible to parry vibro-knives (for starters) in some situations. You'd have to be in grappling range, and you'd be trying to block/redirect the arm instead of the weapon itself. But honestly that's getting too deep into how each GM runs their game to worry about here.

[Axelmania]

If you try to parry an MD weapon attack barehanded you take the usual damage from the weapon. You have to try and parry the arm of the wielder, not the weapon, to have a chance (RUE p. 340).

Thanks for the page! Reading this a sequence of five key sentences stand out...

1. A physical Mega-Damage attack from a Supernatural punch or claw, or an attack with an M.D. melee weapon can be parried/blocked by another M.D. object such as a vibro-blade, an M.D.C. rifle, a piece of M.D.C. metal, or a hand or arm that is clad in M.D.C. armor.

2. A weapon should only be parried with another object.

3. Trying to parry an M.D. weapon with one's bare hand or arm will result in a failed parry and the usual amount of damage will be inflicted by the weapon.

4. Parrying a weapon bare-handed is dangerous and all such attempts are without benefit of the character's parry bonuses.

5. To succeed in a bare-handed parry, the defender must block his attacker by hitting his hand or arm, not the weapon itself.

I'm ignoring 2 off the bat since "should" is merely a guideline to playstyle.

1 is also stating what CAN be done, which is less interesting than what cannot be done or what must be done, so also not really a "rule" except to state what we already know, that objects can parry MD attacks.

3 is where it begins to get interesting. ANY situation of parrying MD weapons with bare hands or arms ALWAYS FAILS... wait... EVEN DRAGONS? You'd think someone with MDC flesh could have a chance of swatting a rune staff aside...

4 doesn't specify MD weapons so it sounds like unlike 3, it is a rule applying to all weapons.

5 like 4 continues to be generic, and appears to still apply to ALL weapons. Meaning it is impossible to parry a short staff directly with your hand, you must always hit the hand (or arm, but hand it generally closer I would assume) of the attacker wielding the weapon (presumably the hand holding the weapon, not an empty hand not wielding the weapon, doesn't say so but it's common sense implication...) to make a parry. The difficulty in this is probably reflected in 4's specification that you do it without bonuses. This is no added difficulty for people who lack bonuses to begin with though, so I would have preferred a basic penalty, kind of like what you do for people who lack WP when there is no strike bonus to halve when bursting, you just apply a -3.

Doesn't take too much to extrapolate that the reverse would be true, but it would depend on the weapon. An energy weapon like a psi-sword (in whatever shape it might be) or a Plasma sword would inflict damage, because the nature of those weapons is such that touching means taking damage.

I don't know about that. Plasma swords are not always 100% plasma, for example. If you mean something like the Kittani Plasma Sword (Atlantis) there's obviously a non-plasma grip so you don't burn your hand, and possibly the guard shown in the illustration. The text doesn't say what portion of the blade radiates plasma.

A lot of the time (like with edged swords, axes, spears) I think a presumption is made that the damage reflects hitting with an intended area. With the "Double Blade Plasma Axe" for example, I think we can understand the implication is that you are hitting with one of the two blades of plasma, "energized to slice" doesn't sound like someone hitting with the flat side of the axe, right?

The same could apply to the sword. All we know is that the sword "radiates plasma energy", but not necessarily which portion it radiates from. It might just well radiate from a single edge of the sword, or just the tip. For that reason, touching may not indicate damage at all. It might be possible for a Kittani who is wielding a plasma sword that is turned on to parry a slave's punch without vaporizing their arm, by using whatever portion of the sword is non-radiating.

We should imagine that possibility for psi-swords too. How do we know that every portion of it is "damaging" energy? We know that non-damaging energy constructs can exist, so psi-weapons could be constructed of non-damaging energy portions and damaging energy portions reflecting what is usually damaging or non-damaging in weapons.

Energy constructs can be kinetic in nature rather than burning like we would expect energy to do, and even if they have portions which damage in a non-kinetic way, that might not reflect the entirety of their structure.

On a parry, no. You're directing the force off to the side. On a straight block, then yes. I'd say 1/2 the punch damage unless the blocker has SN strength, then full damage.

On a parry, no. You're directing the force off to the side. On a straight block, then yes. I'd say 1/2 the punch damage unless the blocker has SN strength, then full damage.

Palladium defines a parry as a block (see page 340 and 346 of RUE), and near as I can tell always has across the various megaversal systems.

I'm still waiting for an RPG which distinguishes between blocking/parrying options existing for all weapons. Closest I've seen is a 2015 proposition at http://forums.sjgames.com/showpost.php? ... ostcount=7 which was never built upon so even GURPS lacks them =/

That's because you're looking for a rule that states that instead of looking at how the weapon operates.

I look at how weapons operate when Palladium goes into detail explaining things like that, which doesn't happen the majority of the time.

Going with your example above, Palladium states that vibro-blades operate by surrounding the blade with an invisible high-frequency energy field that gives them MD capabilities. People naturally take that to mean that it is the field that causes the damage, so if you were to touch it with your bare hand it would damage your hand.

If mere contact with vibro blades' blades caused damage, you'd think they would damage each other, unless that is some special feature of vibro-fields canceling each other out briefly.

But I think it is possible to target an active vibro blade and try to damage it with another vibro blade (depending on how you work called shots with melee weapons) so I'm not so sure there.

What about throwing a vibro-deadball at a vibro-sword trying to damage the vibro sword? Any pages discuss how that dilemma would be resolved?

If you need a cinematic approach for how to look at this, picture fighting Vader. He swings his lightsaber at you. Are you going to attempt to block or redirect his blade with your arm or hand?

Depends on how prepared I was for the attack, I could see doing that in a panic, probably combined with trying to dodge.

Lightsabers do take time to slice through things, they meet some level of resistance, so my arm might slow it down for a necessary millisecond that lets my skull move further out of the way.

Having said that, if your GM is using the combat ranges from N&Sr then I can see it being plausible to parry vibro-knives (for starters) in some situations. You'd have to be in grappling range, and you'd be trying to block/redirect the arm instead of the weapon itself. But honestly that's getting too deep into how each GM runs their game to worry about here.

I'd love more of that, N&S combat ranges are nearly as good as GURPS tactical combat 16 foot spears probably should have some kind of "I can stab you, you can't stab me back" benefits against people with pocket knives, but dealing with Spd and how much you move per action requires a bit of crunching.

[dreicunan]

Doesn't take too much to extrapolate that the reverse would be true, but it would depend on the weapon. An energy weapon like a psi-sword (in whatever shape it might be) or a Plasma sword would inflict damage, because the nature of those weapons is such that touching means taking damage.

I don't know about that. Plasma swords are not always 100% plasma, for example. If you mean something like the Kittani Plasma Sword (Atlantis) there's obviously a non-plasma grip so you don't burn your hand, and possibly the guard shown in the illustration. The text doesn't say what portion of the blade radiates plasma.

A lot of the time (like with edged swords, axes, spears) I think a presumption is made that the damage reflects hitting with an intended area. With the "Double Blade Plasma Axe" for example, I think we can understand the implication is that you are hitting with one of the two blades of plasma, "energized to slice" doesn't sound like someone hitting with the flat side of the axe, right?

The same could apply to the sword. All we know is that the sword "radiates plasma energy", but not necessarily which portion it radiates from. It might just well radiate from a single edge of the sword, or just the tip. For that reason, touching may not indicate damage at all. It might be possible for a Kittani who is wielding a plasma sword that is turned on to parry a slave's punch without vaporizing their arm, by using whatever portion of the sword is non-radiating.

We should imagine that possibility for psi-swords too. How do we know that every portion of it is "damaging" energy? We know that non-damaging energy constructs can exist, so psi-weapons could be constructed of non-damaging energy portions and damaging energy portions reflecting what is usually damaging or non-damaging in weapons.

Energy constructs can be kinetic in nature rather than burning like we would expect energy to do, and even if they have portions which damage in a non-kinetic way, that might not reflect the entirety of their structure.

That is a whole lot of "maybe" for those energy weapons to not be doing damage! That said, for weapons like the plasma axe or sword, I can see allowing it to not damage them while charged (I already noted what I would do mechanically). For something like a psi-weapon, or a flaming sword, I just don't buy it.

[Colonel_Tetsuya]

Doesn't take too much to extrapolate that the reverse would be true, but it would depend on the weapon. An energy weapon like a psi-sword (in whatever shape it might be) or a Plasma sword would inflict damage, because the nature of those weapons is such that touching means taking damage.

I don't know about that. Plasma swords are not always 100% plasma, for example. If you mean something like the Kittani Plasma Sword (Atlantis) there's obviously a non-plasma grip so you don't burn your hand, and possibly the guard shown in the illustration. The text doesn't say what portion of the blade radiates plasma.

A lot of the time (like with edged swords, axes, spears) I think a presumption is made that the damage reflects hitting with an intended area. With the "Double Blade Plasma Axe" for example, I think we can understand the implication is that you are hitting with one of the two blades of plasma, "energized to slice" doesn't sound like someone hitting with the flat side of the axe, right?

The same could apply to the sword. All we know is that the sword "radiates plasma energy", but not necessarily which portion it radiates from. It might just well radiate from a single edge of the sword, or just the tip. For that reason, touching may not indicate damage at all. It might be possible for a Kittani who is wielding a plasma sword that is turned on to parry a slave's punch without vaporizing their arm, by using whatever portion of the sword is non-radiating.

We should imagine that possibility for psi-swords too. How do we know that every portion of it is "damaging" energy? We know that non-damaging energy constructs can exist, so psi-weapons could be constructed of non-damaging energy portions and damaging energy portions reflecting what is usually damaging or non-damaging in weapons.

Energy constructs can be kinetic in nature rather than burning like we would expect energy to do, and even if they have portions which damage in a non-kinetic way, that might not reflect the entirety of their structure.

That is a whole lot of "maybe" for those energy weapons to not be doing damage! That said, for weapons like the plasma axe or sword, I can see allowing it to not damage them while charged (I already noted what I would do mechanically). For something like a psi-weapon, or a flaming sword, I just don't buy it.

I normally don't agree with Axel on much, but in this particular case, he's fairly well nailed it. Vibro-blades still have to hit with the blade portion to cut. The energy field doesn't just create a magic bubble of damage - its focused along the edged portion - otherwise, why bother shaping them like blades at all, and just have them be cylinders.

The Kittani plasma weapons are described in a similar fashion - the blade itself is energized, but why would the energy emanate out of the flat? Again, makes no sense to shape it like a sword if the field just makes it a bar of plasma - just shape it like a bar.

A Psi-sword wielded by a Cyber-Knight as seen in the art is also edged. They are physical in nature (they can be used to parry), and again, why would the non-edged portion damage anything? Its not just an aura of damage. Its clearly focused along the cutting edges.. again, otherwise, why bother shaping it like an edged weapon when you could just make it a bar...

Which IS what the psi-sword wielded by non-Cyber-Knights appears to be (in the Mind Melter art, for instance, thats just a bar of energy he's holding, pretty much). So on that one... sure.

Same with a TW Flaming Sword - its depicted, straight up, as a solid core surrounded on all sides by fire.

So its not an open-and-shut case here. You could easily parry with most MDC hand-weapons (including magic ones and rune weapons) without obliterating the arm of someone trying to punch you.

[dreicunan]

Doesn't take too much to extrapolate that the reverse would be true, but it would depend on the weapon. An energy weapon like a psi-sword (in whatever shape it might be) or a Plasma sword would inflict damage, because the nature of those weapons is such that touching means taking damage.

I don't know about that. Plasma swords are not always 100% plasma, for example. If you mean something like the Kittani Plasma Sword (Atlantis) there's obviously a non-plasma grip so you don't burn your hand, and possibly the guard shown in the illustration. The text doesn't say what portion of the blade radiates plasma.

A lot of the time (like with edged swords, axes, spears) I think a presumption is made that the damage reflects hitting with an intended area. With the "Double Blade Plasma Axe" for example, I think we can understand the implication is that you are hitting with one of the two blades of plasma, "energized to slice" doesn't sound like someone hitting with the flat side of the axe, right?

The same could apply to the sword. All we know is that the sword "radiates plasma energy", but not necessarily which portion it radiates from. It might just well radiate from a single edge of the sword, or just the tip. For that reason, touching may not indicate damage at all. It might be possible for a Kittani who is wielding a plasma sword that is turned on to parry a slave's punch without vaporizing their arm, by using whatever portion of the sword is non-radiating.

We should imagine that possibility for psi-swords too. How do we know that every portion of it is "damaging" energy? We know that non-damaging energy constructs can exist, so psi-weapons could be constructed of non-damaging energy portions and damaging energy portions reflecting what is usually damaging or non-damaging in weapons.

Energy constructs can be kinetic in nature rather than burning like we would expect energy to do, and even if they have portions which damage in a non-kinetic way, that might not reflect the entirety of their structure.

That is a whole lot of "maybe" for those energy weapons to not be doing damage! That said, for weapons like the plasma axe or sword, I can see allowing it to not damage them while charged (I already noted what I would do mechanically). For something like a psi-weapon, or a flaming sword, I just don't buy it.

I normally don't agree with Axel on much, but in this particular case, he's fairly well nailed it. Vibro-blades still have to hit with the blade portion to cut. The energy field doesn't just create a magic bubble of damage - its focused along the edged portion - otherwise, why bother shaping them like blades at all, and just have them be cylinders.

The Kittani plasma weapons are described in a similar fashion - the blade itself is energized, but why would the energy emanate out of the flat? Again, makes no sense to shape it like a sword if the field just makes it a bar of plasma - just shape it like a bar.

A Psi-sword wielded by a Cyber-Knight as seen in the art is also edged. They are physical in nature (they can be used to parry), and again, why would the non-edged portion damage anything? Its not just an aura of damage. Its clearly focused along the cutting edges.. again, otherwise, why bother shaping it like an edged weapon when you could just make it a bar...

Which IS what the psi-sword wielded by non-Cyber-Knights appears to be (in the Mind Melter art, for instance, thats just a bar of energy he's holding, pretty much). So on that one... sure.

Same with a TW Flaming Sword - its depicted, straight up, as a solid core surrounded on all sides by fire.

So its not an open-and-shut case here. You could easily parry with most MDC hand-weapons (including magic ones and rune weapons) without obliterating the arm of someone trying to punch you.

Psi-weapons are entirely composed of energy (Axel and I have been going back and forth on this one for a while due to his attempts to claim that you could use Sword-Chi with a psi-sword; you can see the thread in the HU forum if you like). As is made clear on RUE p. 64, the Cyber-Knight Psi-weapon is indeed originally just a shaft of light, as it states "With age and experience, a Cyber-Knight learns that he can create a Psi-weapon in shapes other than a simple shaft of light." The differences are all cosmetic; they all inflict the same damage, and Kevin S even puts scare quotes around the description of knights with a "blunt" weapon shape while noting that said "blunt" weapons do the same damge. The damage is done because of the energy which makes up the weapon, not the shape of the weapon. Thus, I don't buy any assertion that there is any non-damaging portion of a psi-weapon. Cyber-Knights CAN just shape it like a bar. If you use the "pommel" of a psi-sword to bop someone on the head it does the same damage as the psi-sword would have done with the "blade". Knights apparently make them in other shapes for psychological reasons that do nothing to improve the performance of their weapon. For example, it is mentioned that a Cyber-Knight might change the length of his weapon to match an opponents (not that this would make any difference in Palldium's rules, of course).

That said, I do agree with your overall conclusion (as I'd said earlier in the thread, while noting that I would require some kind of check for the person doing so to avoid damaging their attacker).

[Blue_Lion]

Doesn't take too much to extrapolate that the reverse would be true, but it would depend on the weapon. An energy weapon like a psi-sword (in whatever shape it might be) or a Plasma sword would inflict damage, because the nature of those weapons is such that touching means taking damage.

I don't know about that. Plasma swords are not always 100% plasma, for example. If you mean something like the Kittani Plasma Sword (Atlantis) there's obviously a non-plasma grip so you don't burn your hand, and possibly the guard shown in the illustration. The text doesn't say what portion of the blade radiates plasma.

A lot of the time (like with edged swords, axes, spears) I think a presumption is made that the damage reflects hitting with an intended area. With the "Double Blade Plasma Axe" for example, I think we can understand the implication is that you are hitting with one of the two blades of plasma, "energized to slice" doesn't sound like someone hitting with the flat side of the axe, right?

The same could apply to the sword. All we know is that the sword "radiates plasma energy", but not necessarily which portion it radiates from. It might just well radiate from a single edge of the sword, or just the tip. For that reason, touching may not indicate damage at all. It might be possible for a Kittani who is wielding a plasma sword that is turned on to parry a slave's punch without vaporizing their arm, by using whatever portion of the sword is non-radiating.

We should imagine that possibility for psi-swords too. How do we know that every portion of it is "damaging" energy? We know that non-damaging energy constructs can exist, so psi-weapons could be constructed of non-damaging energy portions and damaging energy portions reflecting what is usually damaging or non-damaging in weapons.

Energy constructs can be kinetic in nature rather than burning like we would expect energy to do, and even if they have portions which damage in a non-kinetic way, that might not reflect the entirety of their structure.

That is a whole lot of "maybe" for those energy weapons to not be doing damage! That said, for weapons like the plasma axe or sword, I can see allowing it to not damage them while charged (I already noted what I would do mechanically). For something like a psi-weapon, or a flaming sword, I just don't buy it.

I normally don't agree with Axel on much, but in this particular case, he's fairly well nailed it. Vibro-blades still have to hit with the blade portion to cut. The energy field doesn't just create a magic bubble of damage - its focused along the edged portion - otherwise, why bother shaping them like blades at all, and just have them be cylinders.

The Kittani plasma weapons are described in a similar fashion - the blade itself is energized, but why would the energy emanate out of the flat? Again, makes no sense to shape it like a sword if the field just makes it a bar of plasma - just shape it like a bar.

A Psi-sword wielded by a Cyber-Knight as seen in the art is also edged. They are physical in nature (they can be used to parry), and again, why would the non-edged portion damage anything? Its not just an aura of damage. Its clearly focused along the cutting edges.. again, otherwise, why bother shaping it like an edged weapon when you could just make it a bar...

Which IS what the psi-sword wielded by non-Cyber-Knights appears to be (in the Mind Melter art, for instance, thats just a bar of energy he's holding, pretty much). So on that one... sure.

Same with a TW Flaming Sword - its depicted, straight up, as a solid core surrounded on all sides by fire.

So its not an open-and-shut case here. You could easily parry with most MDC hand-weapons (including magic ones and rune weapons) without obliterating the arm of someone trying to punch you.

Psi-weapons are entirely composed of energy (Axel and I have been going back and forth on this one for a while due to his attempts to claim that you could use Sword-Chi with a psi-sword; you can see the thread in the HU forum if you like). As is made clear on RUE p. 64, the Cyber-Knight Psi-weapon is indeed originally just a shaft of light, as it states "With age and experience, a Cyber-Knight learns that he can create a Psi-weapon in shapes other than a simple shaft of light." The differences are all cosmetic; they all inflict the same damage, and Kevin S even puts scare quotes around the description of knights with a "blunt" weapon shape while noting that said "blunt" weapons do the same damge. The damage is done because of the energy which makes up the weapon, not the shape of the weapon. Thus, I don't buy any assertion that there is any non-damaging portion of a psi-weapon. Cyber-Knights CAN just shape it like a bar. If you use the "pommel" of a psi-sword to bop someone on the head it does the same damage as the psi-sword would have done with the "blade". Knights apparently make them in other shapes for psychological reasons that do nothing to improve the performance of their weapon. For example, it is mentioned that a Cyber-Knight might change the length of his weapon to match an opponents (not that this would make any difference in Palldium's rules, of course).

That said, I do agree with your overall conclusion (as I'd said earlier in the thread, while noting that I would require some kind of check for the person doing so to avoid damaging their attacker).

Wait I am confused I thought sword chi requires a physical sword to store chi- am I thinking of the wrong power.

[dreicunan]

Wait I am confused I thought sword chi requires a physical sword to store chi- am I thinking of the wrong power.

No, you have the right power in mind. Here is a link to thread in the HU forum to see that discussion.

[Blue_Lion]

I feel sorry for Him dealing it. Some times it does seam like some wild claims made are just trolling.

[The Beast]

I normally don't agree with Axel on much, but in this particular case, he's fairly well nailed it. Vibro-blades still have to hit with the blade portion to cut. The energy field doesn't just create a magic bubble of damage - its focused along the edged portion - otherwise, why bother shaping them like blades at all, and just have them be cylinders....

Actually both descriptions of vibro-blades (RMB, page 205 and RUE, page 259) state that vibro-blades are blade weapons surrounded by an energy field.

[guardiandashi]

I normally don't agree with Axel on much, but in this particular case, he's fairly well nailed it. Vibro-blades still have to hit with the blade portion to cut. The energy field doesn't just create a magic bubble of damage - its focused along the edged portion - otherwise, why bother shaping them like blades at all, and just have them be cylinders....

Actually both descriptions of vibro-blades (RMB, page 205 and RUE, page 259) state that vibro-blades are blade weapons surrounded by an energy field.

While the description doesn't match I always considered them to essentially a high tech version of the electric carving knife

[Axelmania]

That is a whole lot of "maybe" for those energy weapons to not be doing damage!

I didn't say maybe... and it is a realistic question. Consider http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Laser_ax for example. I would expect the Kittani's "Double Bladed Plasma Axe" to be similar in that it's just the blades emitting plasma, not the haft.

Swords obviously are a greater % edge length than axes so parrying them without touching the cutting edge would probably be harder. Palladium doesn't make this distinction between parrying swords and axes though, it's equally hard for axes/swords with normal edges so it should be equally hard for axes/swords with plasma edges.

For something like a psi-weapon, or a flaming sword, I just don't buy it.

Which flaming sword are you referring to? If it's the TW one where it's just a handle and the ENTIRE BLADE is explicitly made of fire, I can see your point about not being able to grab the blade. That's different from the Kittani Plasma Sword where it might just be the edge or tip that you are assumed to be using.

Then again: a blade made entirely of flame should probably work like a Wilk's Laser Knife and not be able to parry physical attacks. That it can parry attacks implies it's got something to it other than just flame.

Psi-weapons are constructed from energy, energy constructs do not necessarily damage everything they touch, so psi-weapons can have non-damaging and damaging parts, just like non-psi weapons. Already explained that.

Psi-weapons are entirely composed of energy (Axel and I have been going back and forth on this one for a while due to his attempts to claim that you could use Sword-Chi with a psi-sword; you can see the thread in the HU forum if you like). As is made clear on RUE p. 64, the Cyber-Knight Psi-weapon is indeed originally just a shaft of light, as it states "With age and experience, a Cyber-Knight learns that he can create a Psi-weapon in shapes other than a simple shaft of light." The differences are all cosmetic; they all inflict the same damage, and Kevin S even puts scare quotes around the description of knights with a "blunt" weapon shape while noting that said "blunt" weapons do the same damge. The damage is done because of the energy which makes up the weapon, not the shape of the weapon.

Shape clearly still matters, otherwise Cyber-Knights could make psi-baloon animals to hurt people with. It isn't merely a contact weapon, because if it was, Cyber-Knights would be harmed by grabbing their own swords, and would be unable to do undamaging parries. If every parry gave a free attack on whatever you parried, that would be a HUGE advantage and Siembieda would have pointed it out. Parries by default are not a damaging combat action and any time they get that advantage it would be specified as an exception.

Being entirely composed of energy does not mean that the energy has equal properties throughout the weapon. The property of psi-weapons is clearly:

1) contact hurts when the knight wills to attack with it
2) parrying is not attacking

Thus, I don't buy any assertion that there is any non-damaging portion of a psi-weapon.

Not even the handle?

Cyber-Knights CAN just shape it like a bar. If you use the "pommel" of a psi-sword to bop someone on the head it does the same damage as the psi-sword would have done with the "blade".

But that's a willing ATTACK, not a parry. As a weapon created out of pure will, the intent matters.

If we had rules for "I trip and fall on my sword" that would raise a good question as to whether or not a cyber-knight could accidentally impale himself in the chest with his own psi-sword. Or a Psi-Slayer on his Psi-Knife.

I don't recall Cyber-Knights having a stated immunity to their own weapons, so there's nothing preventing you from doing doing "Hypnotic Suggestion: That squid you swallowed whole was a shape-shifted Chaing-Ku, you are skilled enough to stab it in your stomach by aiming your sword down your esophagus" and having a Cyber-Knight off himself.

I thought sword chi requires a physical sword to store chi- am I thinking of the wrong power.

No, you have the right power in mind. Here is a link to thread in the HU forum to see that discussion.

Sword Chi isn't the right power, because it has no such requirement. That's fancruft. But hey, let's not bring that here, keep it on the appropriate thread.

both descriptions of vibro-blades (RMB, page 205 and RUE, page 259) state that vibro-blades are blade weapons surrounded by an energy field.

Yes but not "entirely" surrounded, so it's up to us to determine which portion of the weapon is surrounded. Obviously handles are part of weapons and if the handle was surrounded and mere contact with an energy field meant you took damage, you couldn't wield a vibro-blade without taking damage yourself. So there are 2 possibilities:

1) the energy field surrounds everything, including the handle, but since it is not a sharp edge, the field has no effect and it is not damaging to hold it
2) the energy field only surrounds the portions of the weapon intended to inflict damage

[Zer0 Kay]

If you try to parry an MD weapon attack barehanded you take the usual damage from the weapon. You have to try and parry the arm of the wielder, not the weapon, to have a chance (RUE p. 340).

Doesn't take too much to extrapolate that the reverse would be true, but it would depend on the weapon. An energy weapon like a psi-sword (in whatever shape it might be) or a Plasma sword would inflict damage, because the nature of those weapons is such that touching means taking damage. A physical weapon, however, would be able to be used in such a way that it wouldn't necessarily be causing much if any damage (parry with the flat of a sword, for example).

Personally, if the person parrying wanted to minimize damage to or avoid damaging the attacker, I'd either make them roll to pull punch or they'd have to beat the attack roll by 5 to do no damage.

Not true. The side of a sword capable of causing MD that does not have a special field (vibro) would receive no damage. Parry mechanic doesn't care what your parrying with what your parrying. A parry is more of a deflection anyway rather than a block. So no parrying an MDC weapon with an SDC object should cause damage the character finds a way to do so and does it. Side of the blade, the handle, the arm... It doesn't matter... now blocking... that should take full damage.

[Colonel_Tetsuya]

I normally don't agree with Axel on much, but in this particular case, he's fairly well nailed it. Vibro-blades still have to hit with the blade portion to cut. The energy field doesn't just create a magic bubble of damage - its focused along the edged portion - otherwise, why bother shaping them like blades at all, and just have them be cylinders....

Actually both descriptions of vibro-blades (RMB, page 205 and RUE, page 259) state that vibro-blades are blade weapons surrounded by an energy field.

While the description doesn't match I always considered them to essentially a high tech version of the electric carving knife

Thats a good analogy, honestly.

[Blue_Lion]

That is a whole lot of "maybe" for those energy weapons to not be doing damage!

I didn't say maybe... and it is a realistic question. Consider http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Laser_ax for example. I would expect the Kittani's "Double Bladed Plasma Axe" to be similar in that it's just the blades emitting plasma, not the haft.

Swords obviously are a greater % edge length than axes so parrying them without touching the cutting edge would probably be harder. Palladium doesn't make this distinction between parrying swords and axes though, it's equally hard for axes/swords with normal edges so it should be equally hard for axes/swords with plasma edges.

For something like a psi-weapon, or a flaming sword, I just don't buy it.

Which flaming sword are you referring to? If it's the TW one where it's just a handle and the ENTIRE BLADE is explicitly made of fire, I can see your point about not being able to grab the blade. That's different from the Kittani Plasma Sword where it might just be the edge or tip that you are assumed to be using.

Then again: a blade made entirely of flame should probably work like a Wilk's Laser Knife and not be able to parry physical attacks. That it can parry attacks implies it's got something to it other than just flame.

Psi-weapons are constructed from energy, energy constructs do not necessarily damage everything they touch, so psi-weapons can have non-damaging and damaging parts, just like non-psi weapons. Already explained that.

Psi-weapons are entirely composed of energy (Axel and I have been going back and forth on this one for a while due to his attempts to claim that you could use Sword-Chi with a psi-sword; you can see the thread in the HU forum if you like). As is made clear on RUE p. 64, the Cyber-Knight Psi-weapon is indeed originally just a shaft of light, as it states "With age and experience, a Cyber-Knight learns that he can create a Psi-weapon in shapes other than a simple shaft of light." The differences are all cosmetic; they all inflict the same damage, and Kevin S even puts scare quotes around the description of knights with a "blunt" weapon shape while noting that said "blunt" weapons do the same damge. The damage is done because of the energy which makes up the weapon, not the shape of the weapon.

Shape clearly still matters, otherwise Cyber-Knights could make psi-baloon animals to hurt people with. It isn't merely a contact weapon, because if it was, Cyber-Knights would be harmed by grabbing their own swords, and would be unable to do undamaging parries. If every parry gave a free attack on whatever you parried, that would be a HUGE advantage and Siembieda would have pointed it out. Parries by default are not a damaging combat action and any time they get that advantage it would be specified as an exception.

Being entirely composed of energy does not mean that the energy has equal properties throughout the weapon. The property of psi-weapons is clearly:

1) contact hurts when the knight wills to attack with it
2) parrying is not attacking

Thus, I don't buy any assertion that there is any non-damaging portion of a psi-weapon.

Not even the handle?

Cyber-Knights CAN just shape it like a bar. If you use the "pommel" of a psi-sword to bop someone on the head it does the same damage as the psi-sword would have done with the "blade".

But that's a willing ATTACK, not a parry. As a weapon created out of pure will, the intent matters.

If we had rules for "I trip and fall on my sword" that would raise a good question as to whether or not a cyber-knight could accidentally impale himself in the chest with his own psi-sword. Or a Psi-Slayer on his Psi-Knife.

I don't recall Cyber-Knights having a stated immunity to their own weapons, so there's nothing preventing you from doing doing "Hypnotic Suggestion: That squid you swallowed whole was a shape-shifted Chaing-Ku, you are skilled enough to stab it in your stomach by aiming your sword down your esophagus" and having a Cyber-Knight off himself.

I thought sword chi requires a physical sword to store chi- am I thinking of the wrong power.

No, you have the right power in mind. Here is a link to thread in the HU forum to see that discussion.

Sword Chi isn't the right power, because it has no such requirement. That's fancruft. But hey, let's not bring that here, keep it on the appropriate thread.

both descriptions of vibro-blades (RMB, page 205 and RUE, page 259) state that vibro-blades are blade weapons surrounded by an energy field.

Yes but not "entirely" surrounded, so it's up to us to determine which portion of the weapon is surrounded. Obviously handles are part of weapons and if the handle was surrounded and mere contact with an energy field meant you took damage, you couldn't wield a vibro-blade without taking damage yourself. So there are 2 possibilities:

1) the energy field surrounds everything, including the handle, but since it is not a sharp edge, the field has no effect and it is not damaging to hold it
2) the energy field only surrounds the portions of the weapon intended to inflict damage

If I would avoid calling something you disagree with fan craft, given it is a debated topic even less so. (Honestly going off some of the stuff you posted in the past, do not seam to show the same interpretation of the rules as typical other posters.)

[eliakon]

My stance is that since there are no rules, at all what so ever implying that you take damage when parried...
...you don't.
Simply adding automatic "I win" damage to something like parrying is, to me, poor sportsmanship to be honest. It smacks of "Well oh yeah, so you want to attack me? Guess what, I get to stop your attack AND still kill you anyway with my autotmatic damage anyway so nyah."

Basically the reason for the no damage thing is that combat in Palladium is VERY abstract. That parry might be any number of "parry" techniques. Basically... anything that generated a miss that did not involve you moving your body out of the way of the attack. Thus it could be a weapon on weapon parry sure. Or a deflection on their limb. Or a 'beat' where you cause them to flinch and miss at the last minute. Or you stepped inside the swing and they couldn't hit you. Or maybe you feinted and they swung at the empty air...
ALL of those are "parries" and there are tons more.
With out major house rules adding massive amounts of detail and nuance to the system that are not found in it right now there is no way to know what is meant by the terms "parry" or even for the most part "strike" or "dodge" or most of the other combat terms.

As such, a parry is a parry and absent a special in line citation on a specific weapon or what ever there is no damage what so ever dealt on a parry.
(Dramatic exceptions excepted)

NOW if the Defender wants to make a Simultaneous attack... I might be open to allowing something with a suitable penalty.

[dreicunan]

My stance is that since there are no rules, at all what so ever implying that you take damage when parried...
...you don't.
Simply adding automatic "I win" damage to something like parrying is, to me, poor sportsmanship to be honest. It smacks of "Well oh yeah, so you want to attack me? Guess what, I get to stop your attack AND still kill you anyway with my autotmatic damage anyway so nyah."

Basically the reason for the no damage thing is that combat in Palladium is VERY abstract. That parry might be any number of "parry" techniques. Basically... anything that generated a miss that did not involve you moving your body out of the way of the attack. Thus it could be a weapon on weapon parry sure. Or a deflection on their limb. Or a 'beat' where you cause them to flinch and miss at the last minute. Or you stepped inside the swing and they couldn't hit you. Or maybe you feinted and they swung at the empty air...
ALL of those are "parries" and there are tons more.
With out major house rules adding massive amounts of detail and nuance to the system that are not found in it right now there is no way to know what is meant by the terms "parry" or even for the most part "strike" or "dodge" or most of the other combat terms.

As such, a parry is a parry and absent a special in line citation on a specific weapon or what ever there is no damage what so ever dealt on a parry.
(Dramatic exceptions excepted)

NOW if the Defender wants to make a Simultaneous attack... I might be open to allowing something with a suitable penalty.

As I noted previously, Palladium defines a parry as a block (RUE p. 340 and again on p.346b as well as every other instance of a definition of parry that I can find in the various gamelines).

[Shorty Lickens]

MDC metal would not cause damage.
Powered MDC weapons like an activated vibro-blade or TW item and maybe some magic items will cause damage.

[guardiandashi]

I know that for my view of vibro weapons being like a high tech electric knife.
I view the blade as oscillating or shaking, much like the oscillating saws that are becoming more common, basically they have a serrated edge that the unit moves back and forth ~1-2 tooth lengths so it "saws" into whatever it is cutting.
with a vibro blade weapon, I could see it working like that or the blade sort of "shaking" forward and back in the hilt so that as you try to cut, it effectively hits the surface repeatedly... but having it more like the electric carving knife or the oscillating saw so that the blade "saws" back and forth really fast makes more sense when I think about it.

[Zer0 Kay]

I know that for my view of vibro weapons being like a high tech electric knife.
I view the blade as oscillating or shaking, much like the oscillating saws that are becoming more common, basically they have a serrated edge that the unit moves back and forth ~1-2 tooth lengths so it "saws" into whatever it is cutting.
with a vibro blade weapon, I could see it working like that or the blade sort of "shaking" forward and back in the hilt so that as you try to cut, it effectively hits the surface repeatedly... but having it more like the electric carving knife or the oscillating saw so that the blade "saws" back and forth really fast makes more sense when I think about it.

There is no amount of occilation with any edge, unless it is monomolecular that would penetrate MDC. The blade in a fibro blade doesn't do any damage it is the field.

And yet it is not an electric carving knife. It is a blade surrounded by a force field that that alternates its structure at a high frequency.

[Colonel_Tetsuya]

I know that for my view of vibro weapons being like a high tech electric knife.
I view the blade as oscillating or shaking, much like the oscillating saws that are becoming more common, basically they have a serrated edge that the unit moves back and forth ~1-2 tooth lengths so it "saws" into whatever it is cutting.
with a vibro blade weapon, I could see it working like that or the blade sort of "shaking" forward and back in the hilt so that as you try to cut, it effectively hits the surface repeatedly... but having it more like the electric carving knife or the oscillating saw so that the blade "saws" back and forth really fast makes more sense when I think about it.

FWIW, Heroes 2nd Edition, under Aliens, The Vibro Blade (which says it inflicts MD in Rifts) is specifically called out as having its cutting edges surrounded by the field, not the entire weapon.

Thats HU, and not a Rifts book, but it seems consistent. I havent really looked hrough many of the Rifts books on this topic, but im sure ive seen more in depth descriptions of Vibro Blades that mention that the field is only around the cutting edge(s). Phase World maybe? Dunno, ill look as i have time.

[dreicunan]

I know that for my view of vibro weapons being like a high tech electric knife.
I view the blade as oscillating or shaking, much like the oscillating saws that are becoming more common, basically they have a serrated edge that the unit moves back and forth ~1-2 tooth lengths so it "saws" into whatever it is cutting.
with a vibro blade weapon, I could see it working like that or the blade sort of "shaking" forward and back in the hilt so that as you try to cut, it effectively hits the surface repeatedly... but having it more like the electric carving knife or the oscillating saw so that the blade "saws" back and forth really fast makes more sense when I think about it.

FWIW, Heroes 2nd Edition, under Aliens, The Vibro Blade (which says it inflicts MD in Rifts) is specifically called out as having its cutting edges surrounded by the field, not the entire weapon.

Thats HU, and not a Rifts book, but it seems consistent. I havent really looked hrough many of the Rifts books on this topic, but im sure ive seen more in depth descriptions of Vibro Blades that mention that the field is only around the cutting edge(s). Phase World maybe? Dunno, ill look as i have time.

RUEp. 259 describes them as "blade weapons surrounded by an invisible, high frequency field that gives them Mega-Damage capabilities," which is the same description that they had in RMB Chaos Earth is consitent with that wording, as is the GMG. Regarding Phase World, the Power Halberd mentions that its blade starts vibrating at a very high frequency, but does not name it as a Vibro-blade nor mention a high frequency field.

Of note from Heroes 2nd edition is that it is possible to have a vibro-club which is surrounded by the field. The wording for the club is consitent with that of Rifts Earth vibroblades. The HU vibroblades may well have a different design than the Rifts ones regarding the location of the field. If the club inflicts MD, why wouldn't the flat of a vibroblade which is entirely surrounded by the field?

[Colonel_Tetsuya]

I know that for my view of vibro weapons being like a high tech electric knife.
I view the blade as oscillating or shaking, much like the oscillating saws that are becoming more common, basically they have a serrated edge that the unit moves back and forth ~1-2 tooth lengths so it "saws" into whatever it is cutting.
with a vibro blade weapon, I could see it working like that or the blade sort of "shaking" forward and back in the hilt so that as you try to cut, it effectively hits the surface repeatedly... but having it more like the electric carving knife or the oscillating saw so that the blade "saws" back and forth really fast makes more sense when I think about it.

FWIW, Heroes 2nd Edition, under Aliens, The Vibro Blade (which says it inflicts MD in Rifts) is specifically called out as having its cutting edges surrounded by the field, not the entire weapon.

Thats HU, and not a Rifts book, but it seems consistent. I havent really looked hrough many of the Rifts books on this topic, but im sure ive seen more in depth descriptions of Vibro Blades that mention that the field is only around the cutting edge(s). Phase World maybe? Dunno, ill look as i have time.

RUEp. 259 describes them as "blade weapons surrounded by an invisible, high frequency field that gives them Mega-Damage capabilities," which is the same description that they had in RMB Chaos Earth is consitent with that wording, as is the GMG. Regarding Phase World, the Power Halberd mentions that its blade starts vibrating at a very high frequency, but does not name it as a Vibro-blade nor mention a high frequency field.

Of note from Heroes 2nd edition is that it is possible to have a vibro-club which is surrounded by the field. The wording for the club is consitent with that of Rifts Earth vibroblades. The HU vibroblades may well have a different design than the Rifts ones regarding the location of the field. If the club inflicts MD, why wouldn't the flat of a vibroblade which is entirely surrounded by the field?

Then why bother making them shaped like swords? If the entire thing is surrounded and dangerous anyway, there is NO purpose or benefit to be had making them sword-shaped.

Making the field surround the entire sword would also render them completely useless for about ~40% of sword techniques and make them dangerous to the user. A lot of techniques rely on resting the flat on an object (rim of your shield, your forearm, braced against your palm, among others) to be useful. Additionally, a lot of strikes (or even parries or hard blocks) can wind up with the flat rebounding into you. It'd be like trying to fight with a real lightsaber - you'd kill yourself.

As for vibro-clubs, those have existed in Rifts as well; its the "head" or usually, spikes on the weapon that are vibro-enabled, not the entire thing. Again, making the entire thing dangerous is just a really great way to kill yourself. (and would also in a lot of cases make the club completely unwieldable as you need to be able to choke up on the haft).

Im curious.. do you understand the concept of "preponderance of evidence"? Because it doesn't seem like you do.

[The Beast]

Whether the blade is surrounded by the field or just the cutting edge gets the field is kind of irrelevant. What is relevant is if you'd take damage. I think a practical demonstration would work best, so everyone who's saying you would go get a couple of your friends, a knife and a video camera. Give one friend the knife, tell him to block your attacks with the knife, and then start punching him. Have the other one record it so you all can upload it to YouTube later so we can all see how it worked out for you. Just make sure that person hold their phone sideways if you record it with a smartphone. I hate watching those videos when they're held the wrong way.

[Blue_Lion]

@the Beast
1 is that relevant to game mechanics?
2 that is unsafe request.-You would want to have them use a training knife that has no sharp edges but instead leaves marks with the cutting side.

My personal feeling would be why it may seam logical I would not allow damage for parring sdc with MD weapon seams exploitative way to do damage.

[dreicunan]

I know that for my view of vibro weapons being like a high tech electric knife.
I view the blade as oscillating or shaking, much like the oscillating saws that are becoming more common, basically they have a serrated edge that the unit moves back and forth ~1-2 tooth lengths so it "saws" into whatever it is cutting.
with a vibro blade weapon, I could see it working like that or the blade sort of "shaking" forward and back in the hilt so that as you try to cut, it effectively hits the surface repeatedly... but having it more like the electric carving knife or the oscillating saw so that the blade "saws" back and forth really fast makes more sense when I think about it.

FWIW, Heroes 2nd Edition, under Aliens, The Vibro Blade (which says it inflicts MD in Rifts) is specifically called out as having its cutting edges surrounded by the field, not the entire weapon.

Thats HU, and not a Rifts book, but it seems consistent. I havent really looked hrough many of the Rifts books on this topic, but im sure ive seen more in depth descriptions of Vibro Blades that mention that the field is only around the cutting edge(s). Phase World maybe? Dunno, ill look as i have time.

RUEp. 259 describes them as "blade weapons surrounded by an invisible, high frequency field that gives them Mega-Damage capabilities," which is the same description that they had in RMB Chaos Earth is consitent with that wording, as is the GMG. Regarding Phase World, the Power Halberd mentions that its blade starts vibrating at a very high frequency, but does not name it as a Vibro-blade nor mention a high frequency field.

Of note from Heroes 2nd edition is that it is possible to have a vibro-club which is surrounded by the field. The wording for the club is consitent with that of Rifts Earth vibroblades. The HU vibroblades may well have a different design than the Rifts ones regarding the location of the field. If the club inflicts MD, why wouldn't the flat of a vibroblade which is entirely surrounded by the field?

Then why bother making them shaped like swords? If the entire thing is surrounded and dangerous anyway, there is NO purpose or benefit to be had making them sword-shaped.

Making the field surround the entire sword would also render them completely useless for about ~40% of sword techniques and make them dangerous to the user. A lot of techniques rely on resting the flat on an object (rim of your shield, your forearm, braced against your palm, among others) to be useful. Additionally, a lot of strikes (or even parries or hard blocks) can wind up with the flat rebounding into you. It'd be like trying to fight with a real lightsaber - you'd kill yourself.

As for vibro-clubs, those have existed in Rifts as well; its the "head" or usually, spikes on the weapon that are vibro-enabled, not the entire thing. Again, making the entire thing dangerous is just a really great way to kill yourself. (and would also in a lot of cases make the club completely unwieldable as you need to be able to choke up on the haft).

Im curious.. do you understand the concept of "preponderance of evidence"? Because it doesn't seem like you do.

I do understand the concept, yes. For example, if every single example of the text cited so far describing a vibroweapon in rifts says that the weapon is surrounded by a field, whereas there is one example from HU that says it is only the cutting edge, then the preponderence of evidence suggests that the field surrounds the whole blade for Rifts vibroblades. The fact that a vibroclub can exist and do MD suggests that the field surrounding vibroweapons allows non-bladed weapons to do damage.

If you can cite where an actual occurence of a vibro-club in Rifts, I'd appreciate it. I've found no such weapon in the GMG.

Now, all that said, I can also easily see an argument being made that the field only allows for MD capacity without actually inflicting the damage. How it does that, who knows, but that would explain why the weapons are designed the way that they are. That would allow the techniques to which you refer to be used (at the very least so long as you are placing the flat against other MD materials).

Of course, it is also possible that a vibro-blade is not able to be wielded with all the same techniques as a non-vibro-blade.

[The Beast]

@the Beast
1 is that relevant to game mechanics?

Yes it is relevant. Especially when one takes into pages 16 - 18 of the original conversion book where Kevin is writing about hearing "pretty silly and outrageous incidents regarding players abusing the concept behind SDC for player characters." To summarize, he's basically saying to use common sense.

2 that is unsafe request.-You would want to have them use a training knife that has no sharp edges but instead leaves marks with the cutting side.

The reason I went with such a ludicrous suggestion is to demonstrate how absurd an idea is that one wouldn't take damage if their bare fist was parried by a MD cutting any weapon. You said you're deployed right now, punch the side of your M16. I don't mean a little love tap; punch it like it just slept with your mom and then left her on the side of the road in whatever jacked-up part of the world you like the least. Even if it's only the equivalent of one or two points of damage you know doing that will result in a sore hand.

But let's go with your suggestion. Instead of using an actual knife just use one of those fake, plastic ones you get around Halloween that come with the fake blood. You might be able to break the skin with one of those, but more likely you'll just end up with a scratch mark or two. Now apply that to MD cutting weapons and realize that every body part from the scratch marks down to the tips of the fingers would be removed.

[Library Ogre]

The only time I recall this being talked about is the combat example in TMNT&OS, where a bad guy parries the PC's katana. The player asks if it hurts him, and the GM rules he parried it with his gun. To my knowledge, rules regarding this have never been outlined.

[Zer0 Kay]

Whether the blade is surrounded by the field or just the cutting edge gets the field is kind of irrelevant. What is relevant is if you'd take damage. I think a practical demonstration would work best, so everyone who's saying you would go get a couple of your friends, a knife and a video camera. Give one friend the knife, tell him to block your attacks with the knife, and then start punching him. Have the other one record it so you all can upload it to YouTube later so we can all see how it worked out for you. Just make sure that person hold their phone sideways if you record it with a smartphone. I hate watching those videos when they're held the wrong way.

Well are we going to tell him to block or parry? The techniques are different

[Zer0 Kay]

@the Beast
1 is that relevant to game mechanics?

Yes it is relevant. Especially when one takes into pages 16 - 18 of the original conversion book where Kevin is writing about hearing "pretty silly and outrageous incidents regarding players abusing the concept behind SDC for player characters." To summarize, he's basically saying to use common sense.

2 that is unsafe request.-You would want to have them use a training knife that has no sharp edges but instead leaves marks with the cutting side.

The reason I went with such a ludicrous suggestion is to demonstrate how absurd an idea is that one wouldn't take damage if their bare fist was parried by a MD cutting any weapon. You said you're deployed right now, punch the side of your M16. I don't mean a little love tap; punch it like it just slept with your mom and then left her on the side of the road in whatever jacked-up part of the world you like the least. Even if it's only the equivalent of one or two points of damage you know doing that will result in a sore hand.

But let's go with your suggestion. Instead of using an actual knife just use one of those fake, plastic ones you get around Halloween that come with the fake blood. You might be able to break the skin with one of those, but more likely you'll just end up with a scratch mark or two. Now apply that to MD cutting weapons and realize that every body part from the scratch marks down to the tips of the fingers would be removed.

One does not party with the cutting edge.

[Zer0 Kay]

I know that for my view of vibro weapons being like a high tech electric knife.
I view the blade as oscillating or shaking, much like the oscillating saws that are becoming more common, basically they have a serrated edge that the unit moves back and forth ~1-2 tooth lengths so it "saws" into whatever it is cutting.
with a vibro blade weapon, I could see it working like that or the blade sort of "shaking" forward and back in the hilt so that as you try to cut, it effectively hits the surface repeatedly... but having it more like the electric carving knife or the oscillating saw so that the blade "saws" back and forth really fast makes more sense when I think about it.

FWIW, Heroes 2nd Edition, under Aliens, The Vibro Blade (which says it inflicts MD in Rifts) is specifically called out as having its cutting edges surrounded by the field, not the entire weapon.

Thats HU, and not a Rifts book, but it seems consistent. I havent really looked hrough many of the Rifts books on this topic, but im sure ive seen more in depth descriptions of Vibro Blades that mention that the field is only around the cutting edge(s). Phase World maybe? Dunno, ill look as i have time.

RUEp. 259 describes them as "blade weapons surrounded by an invisible, high frequency field that gives them Mega-Damage capabilities," which is the same description that they had in RMB Chaos Earth is consitent with that wording, as is the GMG. Regarding Phase World, the Power Halberd mentions that its blade starts vibrating at a very high frequency, but does not name it as a Vibro-blade nor mention a high frequency field.

Of note from Heroes 2nd edition is that it is possible to have a vibro-club which is surrounded by the field. The wording for the club is consitent with that of Rifts Earth vibroblades. The HU vibroblades may well have a different design than the Rifts ones regarding the location of the field. If the club inflicts MD, why wouldn't the flat of a vibroblade which is entirely surrounded by the field?

Then why bother making them shaped like swords? If the entire thing is surrounded and dangerous anyway, there is NO purpose or benefit to be had making them sword-shaped.

Making the field surround the entire sword would also render them completely useless for about ~40% of sword techniques and make them dangerous to the user. A lot of techniques rely on resting the flat on an object (rim of your shield, your forearm, braced against your palm, among others) to be useful. Additionally, a lot of strikes (or even parries or hard blocks) can wind up with the flat rebounding into you. It'd be like trying to fight with a real lightsaber - you'd kill yourself.

As for vibro-clubs, those have existed in Rifts as well; its the "head" or usually, spikes on the weapon that are vibro-enabled, not the entire thing. Again, making the entire thing dangerous is just a really great way to kill yourself. (and would also in a lot of cases make the club completely unwieldable as you need to be able to choke up on the haft).

Im curious.. do you understand the concept of "preponderance of evidence"? Because it doesn't seem like you do.

Guess they need to learn non European fighting styles probably single digit in percentage of techniques where any contact with the blade by the user is done.

[dreicunan]

Whether the blade is surrounded by the field or just the cutting edge gets the field is kind of irrelevant. What is relevant is if you'd take damage. I think a practical demonstration would work best, so everyone who's saying you would go get a couple of your friends, a knife and a video camera. Give one friend the knife, tell him to block your attacks with the knife, and then start punching him. Have the other one record it so you all can upload it to YouTube later so we can all see how it worked out for you. Just make sure that person hold their phone sideways if you record it with a smartphone. I hate watching those videos when they're held the wrong way.

Well are we going to tell him to block or parry? The techniques are different

Allow me to once again point out that Palladium defines a parry as a block (See RUE p. 340 and 346, as well as every other version of the Palladium combat rules that I have seen so far except for Valley of the Pharaohs, which does not use the megaversal system).

[eliakon]

Whether the blade is surrounded by the field or just the cutting edge gets the field is kind of irrelevant. What is relevant is if you'd take damage. I think a practical demonstration would work best, so everyone who's saying you would go get a couple of your friends, a knife and a video camera. Give one friend the knife, tell him to block your attacks with the knife, and then start punching him. Have the other one record it so you all can upload it to YouTube later so we can all see how it worked out for you. Just make sure that person hold their phone sideways if you record it with a smartphone. I hate watching those videos when they're held the wrong way.

Well are we going to tell him to block or parry? The techniques are different

Allow me to once again point out that Palladium defines a parry as a block (See RUE p. 340 and 346, as well as every other version of the Palladium combat rules that I have seen so far except for Valley of the Pharaohs, which does not use the megaversal system).

I will point out again that it doesn't seem to say what you think it says.
It says that "A parry blocks the attackers strike, preventing damage from being inflicted."
This does not mean that it is a physical block though, it simply... wait for it... blocks the strike from hitting.
It does NOT state that the parry requires that you use your object to block their object for instance. It is still blocking the strike if I hit your arm with my club and thereby block you from hitting me.

I will FURTHER note that on page 340 we are explicitly told that hitting the hand or arm IS considered a parry.

[Colonel_Tetsuya]

Of course, it is also possible that a vibro-blade is not able to be wielded with all the same techniques as a non-vibro-blade.

Then you can't use the W.P. for the weapon type with a vibro-blade. Otherwise, you're learning a skill that teaches you (through muscle memory) to do things that will actively harm you.

[Colonel_Tetsuya]

@the Beast
1 is that relevant to game mechanics?

Yes it is relevant. Especially when one takes into pages 16 - 18 of the original conversion book where Kevin is writing about hearing "pretty silly and outrageous incidents regarding players abusing the concept behind SDC for player characters." To summarize, he's basically saying to use common sense.

2 that is unsafe request.-You would want to have them use a training knife that has no sharp edges but instead leaves marks with the cutting side.

The reason I went with such a ludicrous suggestion is to demonstrate how absurd an idea is that one wouldn't take damage if their bare fist was parried by a MD cutting any weapon.

You dont parry with the cutting edge. Or block with the cutting edge. That's how you end up with no cutting edge. And/or no weapon, as it will break. Even a hard punch-block with a sword uses the flat. And you dont ram the flat into their fist. You punch it out laterally and stiffen your arm, so their strike comes in, in this case their forearm lands up against the flat of your blade, and stops (as you have stiffened your arm to block instead of parrying it away).

You said you're deployed right now, punch the side of your M16. I don't mean a little love tap; punch it like it just slept with your mom and then left her on the side of the road in whatever jacked-up part of the world you like the least. Even if it's only the equivalent of one or two points of damage you know doing that will result in a sore hand.

.... /asciipcardfacepalm.

Even if you were blocking/parrying with your M-16 or M-4, you wouldn't try to intercept his fist and have him punch your weapon; you'd either parry it aside, using the weapon like a bar or club, or do a stiff block, again, by catching his forearm and just not moving your weapon. Trying to intercept his fist so he punches your weapon would be a great way to completely miss the block/parry.

Which is why you never do that. You always make the move that leads to the most likelihood of actually stopping the attack.

But let's go with your suggestion. Instead of using an actual knife just use one of those fake, plastic ones you get around Halloween that come with the fake blood. You might be able to break the skin with one of those, but more likely you'll just end up with a scratch mark or two. Now apply that to MD cutting weapons and realize that every body part from the scratch marks down to the tips of the fingers would be removed.

If i had the camera equipment (i dont), i could do you one better; i could use HEMA or LARP weapons (i have both) and coat the edge surfaces with water based paint. We use it in HEMA precisely for what you're suggesting - telling if you actually made a cut edge-on and properly indexed. You'd be surprised how little paint would be on the other guys' forearm. The LARP weapons have some flex, so they might spatter some, but the HEMA weapons are acrylic and carbon fiber. If you're parrying or even hard-blocking correctly, the edge will never hit them. Youll catch them squarely on the flat.

A guy with fists facing a guy with a sword has a much bigger problem anyway - simply getting into range without being killed. If he actually manages to close enough to get into striking range, hes inside your reach with all but small knives, and you've got a serious problem, since if he's any good at martial arts, you're likely to end up disarmed and severely hurt. Once hes close enough to actually strike you with his fists, hes also close enough to parry your sword strikes (if you can even make them - with a traditional war sword (what palladium calls a "long sword" - one handed) or long sword (what palladium and most other games call bastard swords) - you cant even make a swing that will hurt him. But if he's close enough to hit you with his fists, hes close enough to parry/redirect your arms, and probably put you in a joint lock.

That's IF he can get into range without being killed. If the guy with a sword knows what he's doing... good luck. A little easier in Palladium because of an abstract damage system with a pool of points, sure.

[dreicunan]

Whether the blade is surrounded by the field or just the cutting edge gets the field is kind of irrelevant. What is relevant is if you'd take damage. I think a practical demonstration would work best, so everyone who's saying you would go get a couple of your friends, a knife and a video camera. Give one friend the knife, tell him to block your attacks with the knife, and then start punching him. Have the other one record it so you all can upload it to YouTube later so we can all see how it worked out for you. Just make sure that person hold their phone sideways if you record it with a smartphone. I hate watching those videos when they're held the wrong way.

Well are we going to tell him to block or parry? The techniques are different

Allow me to once again point out that Palladium defines a parry as a block (See RUE p. 340 and 346, as well as every other version of the Palladium combat rules that I have seen so far except for Valley of the Pharaohs, which does not use the megaversal system).

I will point out again that it doesn't seem to say what you think it says.
It says that "A parry blocks the attackers strike, preventing damage from being inflicted."
This does not mean that it is a physical block though, it simply... wait for it... blocks the strike from hitting.
It does NOT state that the parry requires that you use your object to block their object for instance. It is still blocking the strike if I hit your arm with my club and thereby block you from hitting me.

I will FURTHER note that on page 340 we are explicitly told that hitting the hand or arm IS considered a parry.

The rest of the parrying entry on p. 340 contradicts,what you are,saying, as does p. 346's definition of the term parry: "A defender can attempt to parry most physical attacks. This is done by blocking the attacker's blow with a weapon or hand."

As to your further note, I will merely cite the exact wording of the sentence to which you refer with a little bolding for added emphasis: "To succeed in a bare-handed parry, the defender must block his attacker by hitting his arm or hand, not the weapon itself."

Now, all that said, I have come across one place where the definition of a parry is expanded: Rift's GMG p. 33 says "a parry is generally used to deflect or physically block an attack." (Emphasis original) I'm not going to play any games here about publication dates. The correct position is thus that the Palladium definition of a parry encompasses both blocks and the common definition of a parry. It would be nice if that were made clear in RUE!

Of course, it is also possible that a vibro-blade is not able to be wielded with all the same techniques as a non-vibro-blade.

Then you can't use the W.P. for the weapon type with a vibro-blade. Otherwise, you're learning a skill that teaches you (through muscle memory) to do things that will actively harm you.

If it is true that a vibro-blade couldn't be wielded with all the same techniques, then I could see that conclusion being reached for characters from cultures with no knowledge of vibroblades. For those that do, it would be part of the WP training. If WP Sword can make you equally proficient with a rapier, a gladius, a flamberge, a scimitar, a daikatana, and a broadsword, it doesn't require any additional suspension of disbelief for it to also teach you how to correctly use a vibrosword.

That said, after thinking upon this more I find myself preferring the interpretation that the field makes them somehow MD capable. This is in part because in the GMG it makes it clear on page 32 that the PS damage bonus be applied to them due to the physical component of the weapon. Ironic, of course, that in Rifts that damage would almost never matterrl, but that means that the physical portion does matter in the inflicting of damage.

[Zer0 Kay]

Whether the blade is surrounded by the field or just the cutting edge gets the field is kind of irrelevant. What is relevant is if you'd take damage. I think a practical demonstration would work best, so everyone who's saying you would go get a couple of your friends, a knife and a video camera. Give one friend the knife, tell him to block your attacks with the knife, and then start punching him. Have the other one record it so you all can upload it to YouTube later so we can all see how it worked out for you. Just make sure that person hold their phone sideways if you record it with a smartphone. I hate watching those videos when they're held the wrong way.

And what does the N&S book say about blocks?
Well are we going to tell him to block or parry? The techniques are different

Allow me to once again point out that Palladium defines a parry as a block (See RUE p. 340 and 346, as well as every other version of the Palladium combat rules that I have seen so far except for Valley of the Pharaohs, which does not use the megaversal system).

So then what does N&S (a megaversal system that even has an MD weapon in it) about a block then?

[Zer0 Kay]

Of course, it is also possible that a vibro-blade is not able to be wielded with all the same techniques as a non-vibro-blade.

Then you can't use the W.P. for the weapon type with a vibro-blade. Otherwise, you're learning a skill that teaches you (through muscle memory) to do things that will actively harm you.

Seriously? So according to that logic you can't use W.P. sword with a foil, epee or other fencing sword and depending on your ideals of sword play the W.P. will only work with particular swords that can do everything YOU want them to surprised both single and two edged count as swords for you. Do great swords count as swords since most had blunt edges as sharpening them wasn't important vs. Platemail?

A vibro blade counts as a sword because its reach is greater than a dagger, the damage potential is along the whole length instead of concentrated at the end like a vibro mace also it is balanced at the hilt not the end (probably more important to how it is used than where its damage potential is), the handle is on one end so it can't be used like a staff. So we can classify it as a sword or maybe a (long) fighting stick but users of fighting sticks would expect blunt damage. If there is any arguement it should be that a vibro mace is more like a vibro axe than a mace.

[Blue_Lion]

Not official- but when when I think block I think like a shield where you put something in the way to take the hit. Same with blocking in a fight where you put your arms up to take the punches instead of your face. Now that would clearly make contact with the leading edge. Basically you directly challenge the incoming blow.

When I think parry I think more about moves that deflect the blow to the side. Now while technically a type of block(An obstacle to the normal progress or functioning of something) you usually do not make contact with direct opposing force like you would blocking with a shield.

This to me explains why true blocking moves shield and arm sacrifice of robots take damage, while a parry does not.

To me if some one takes damage for blocking a MD weapon with SDC the same logic would say you take damage blocking a sword when unarmed. (while it may seam logical it is exploitative and I would think a trained fighter could parry an attack without a direct force confrontation. This is more cinematic combat than real life.)

[Colonel_Tetsuya]

you would blocking with a shield.

That isn't actually how you use a shield, either, in almost all circumstances. If you just put the shield "in the way", you leave it open to being manipulated by the enemy and used to drag you, your shield, and even the people near you out of position to be killed.

You dont, for instance, hold your shield flat across your body. Not even the Romans did this - thats why Scuta were curved. If you do so, i can punch the outside edge of the shield with my pommel and your shield will open up, allowing me to strike your body. Or i can hook the pommel of my sword against an edge and literally drag you around. You actively parry with a shield just like you do with a sword. You have to keep it mobile and attempt to actively use it to defend.

The few exceptions are almost all in very specific situations - horseback, for instance, often times shields were strapped directly to the sadddle and used more as passive armor for your off-flank and for your mount. Jousting shields were similar - bolted and buckled straight to the armor, and eventually, as armoring technology got better, removed entirely in favor of just having specialized plates in that location that did the same job better for less weight.

But on the ground, shields are not immobile objects you just sorta throw in the way.

[Blue_Lion]

you would blocking with a shield.

That isn't actually how you use a shield, either, in almost all circumstances. If you just put the shield "in the way", you leave it open to being manipulated by the enemy and used to drag you, your shield, and even the people near you out of position to be killed.

You dont, for instance, hold your shield flat across your body. Not even the Romans did this - thats why Scuta were curved. If you do so, i can punch the outside edge of the shield with my pommel and your shield will open up, allowing me to strike your body. Or i can hook the pommel of my sword against an edge and literally drag you around. You actively parry with a shield just like you do with a sword. You have to keep it mobile and attempt to actively use it to defend.

The few exceptions are almost all in very specific situations - horseback, for instance, often times shields were strapped directly to the sadddle and used more as passive armor for your off-flank and for your mount. Jousting shields were similar - bolted and buckled straight to the armor, and eventually, as armoring technology got better, removed entirely in favor of just having specialized plates in that location that did the same job better for less weight.

But on the ground, shields are not immobile objects you just sorta throw in the way.

I never said you hold the shield immobile. But blocking with a shield is putting the shield in a position to take the blow instead of you. (Hooking the shield with the pommel or bottom of the hilt to attempt to drag your opponent can be highly risky as they can use the attempt pull you off balance and pull you into their strike. You might be able to pull it off with a novice but a skilled person can use the attempt against you. Or pull your sword from your grip my experience leverage does not favor you in this.) Not that pommel strikes do not have their use but doing the moves you suggest against some one that knows what they are doing is difficult to pull off.

My shield in a melee fight is both a weapon(I can use it to strike my bash my opponent) and a defense I move it constantly to make the best of use of it. But when I block I place it to take the attack instead of me. Now in a shield wall my shield becomes some what immobile and I use my weapon to protect myself.(moving the shield to defend me would risk creating an opening in the wall.)

Here is a an example of a shield drill at arts of mars Academy for Historical European Swordsmanship.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=amXxYTb--Z0

It clearly shows him moving the shield into position to block the attack and the shield takes the brunt of the attack. It is not moving the attack away like what I think of as a parry but stopping the attack by blocking it.

(The point of my post was about the what I perceive the difference of parry and block. I would advise you not to make it into you trying to prove yourself an expert on all things ancient combat.)

[Zer0 Kay]

Not official- but when when I think block I think like a shield where you put something in the way to take the hit. Same with blocking in a fight where you put your arms up to take the punches instead of your face. Now that would clearly make contact with the leading edge. Basically you directly challenge the incoming blow.

When I think parry I think more about moves that deflect the blow to the side. Now while technically a type of block(An obstacle to the normal progress or functioning of something) you usually do not make contact with direct opposing force like you would blocking with a shield.

This to me explains why true blocking moves shield and arm sacrifice of robots take damage, while a parry does not.

To me if some one takes damage for blocking a MD weapon with SDC the same logic would say you take damage blocking a sword when unarmed. (while it may seam logical it is exploitative and I would think a trained fighter could parry an attack without a direct force confrontation. This is more cinematic combat than real life.)

Agree... but dude... are you alright? I didn't catch any typos

[dreicunan]

Whether the blade is surrounded by the field or just the cutting edge gets the field is kind of irrelevant. What is relevant is if you'd take damage. I think a practical demonstration would work best, so everyone who's saying you would go get a couple of your friends, a knife and a video camera. Give one friend the knife, tell him to block your attacks with the knife, and then start punching him. Have the other one record it so you all can upload it to YouTube later so we can all see how it worked out for you. Just make sure that person hold their phone sideways if you record it with a smartphone. I hate watching those videos when they're held the wrong way.

And what does the N&S book say about blocks?
Well are we going to tell him to block or parry? The techniques are different

Allow me to once again point out that Palladium defines a parry as a block (See RUE p. 340 and 346, as well as every other version of the Palladium combat rules that I have seen so far except for Valley of the Pharaohs, which does not use the megaversal system).

So then what does N&S (a megaversal system that even has an MD weapon in it) about a block then?

N&S had the same language, but please see my post above regarding Rifts GMG p. 33, which defines a parry as either a deflection or a block.

[Blue_Lion]

Not official- but when when I think block I think like a shield where you put something in the way to take the hit. Same with blocking in a fight where you put your arms up to take the punches instead of your face. Now that would clearly make contact with the leading edge. Basically you directly challenge the incoming blow.

When I think parry I think more about moves that deflect the blow to the side. Now while technically a type of block(An obstacle to the normal progress or functioning of something) you usually do not make contact with direct opposing force like you would blocking with a shield.

This to me explains why true blocking moves shield and arm sacrifice of robots take damage, while a parry does not.

To me if some one takes damage for blocking a MD weapon with SDC the same logic would say you take damage blocking a sword when unarmed. (while it may seam logical it is exploitative and I would think a trained fighter could parry an attack without a direct force confrontation. This is more cinematic combat than real life.)

Agree... but dude... are you alright? I didn't catch any typos

Other than where I am at I am fine. And I count three type-os.

[Zer0 Kay]

Not official- but when when I think block I think like a shield where you put something in the way to take the hit. Same with blocking in a fight where you put your arms up to take the punches instead of your face. Now that would clearly make contact with the leading edge. Basically you directly challenge the incoming blow.

When I think parry I think more about moves that deflect the blow to the side. Now while technically a type of block(An obstacle to the normal progress or functioning of something) you usually do not make contact with direct opposing force like you would blocking with a shield.

This to me explains why true blocking moves shield and arm sacrifice of robots take damage, while a parry does not.

To me if some one takes damage for blocking a MD weapon with SDC the same logic would say you take damage blocking a sword when unarmed. (while it may seam logical it is exploitative and I would think a trained fighter could parry an attack without a direct force confrontation. This is more cinematic combat than real life.)

Agree... but dude... are you alright? I didn't catch any typos

Other than where I am at I am fine. And I count three type-os.

Hmm just not as blatant as some good health too you friend.