New GM, How Do I Balance Early Battles/Rewards

[Colonel_Tetsuya]

Considering that plunder (not even including body armor) from a six man squad whi each have a rifle and sidearm could easily be in the 50-75k credits range... Up to you.

[Greyaxe]

Depends on if you are looking for a nitty gritty, barely keeping your heads above water or an epic world saving campaign. resources significantly change things in Rifts as they do in life. I like the scrounging for credits salvaging ll we can form the bad guys black-market underworld style of campaign. But others prefer a resource rich high level epic style. Either way you choose remember the GM givith and he can taketh away. Nothing encourages good roleplaying than someone stealing all your cool gear, just give them opportunity to get it back.

[Killer Cyborg]

It all depends on what kind of characters you have in the party, and what kind of adventure/campaign you plan on running.
More info there would help me know what to tell you.

[Noon]

Hello,

I'm starting a rifts game up soon (4 player's + myself) and I'm having trouble finding any guidelines on how to balance early encounters, and how to reward players with loot. My concern is that I'm going to make the first level too difficult, shred everyone's M.D.C. armor, and then have to tell them that they're going to need to fork out 20k+ credits to get a new suit.

You could allow armour of ithan scrolls to be fairly common and cheap to buy - give the available scrolls the amount of MDC you think they'd need. They just need to remember to read them before fighting! That's by the book, but not really hinted at in the setting.

I've talked about a sort of house ruled solution over here, where maybe you can find pieces of dinosaur bone, MDC ruins, ecomancer armour scraps, stuff like that and use that to patch a few points of damage on your armour.

Other than that or the scrolls or very convenient mages who know a mend the broken spell and will do it for the price of a drink, there really isn't a solution - income is unlikely to match expenditure on armour repairs.

And now, great, I can have the same argument with Killer Cyborg as I did before, where he assumes the problem is just that going to town to get the armour is the bother, rather than the problem being that either you don't have 20k or soon wont!

Considering that plunder (not even including body armor) from a six man squad whi each have a rifle and sidearm could easily be in the 50-75k credits range... Up to you.

Can you tell me how much you sell loot for at the black market in your game? It's not the unmodified book price, is it? When by the book it's more like 10% of the listed black market price (for undamaged gear).

[Killer Cyborg]

It all depends on what kind of characters you have in the party, and what kind of adventure/campaign you plan on running.
More info there would help me know what to tell you.

Thanks for getting back to me, and I'm glad to give you more details if you're interested.

The party:
My group was originally playing TMNT and Other Strangeness (we had played as kids and wanted to give it another shot), but after a few months we started feeling like characters in that game were pretty limited, so we're switching over to Rifts. Previously, the guys in my group were all selfish alignments, but leaning towards the good guy side of things. They would typically step in and help people, but were typically expecting some kind of reward for their assistance.

I have one guy playing techno-wizard, who is actually more excited about the prospect of his devices blowing up in his face than being powerful useful tools/weapons, and a rogue scholar who's heavily focused on his skills and describes his character as an intellectual jewel-thief. Both of those guys are fairly experienced with RPGs and really like playing in character and creating tension, especially with each other.

Then there are two guys who haven't played many RPGs before and tend to lean towards the Hack-n-Slash side of things. One will be playing a crazy (not sure what he wants for his background), while the other is planning on playing a headhunter who is a reconstructed version of his character from TMNT (the idea being that he survived the apocalypse in suspended animation and has been recovered and reconstructed).

The Campaign:
I'm planning on having it start with the headhunter being reconstructed and revived, which should give the campaign a "stranger-comes-to-town" feel. He'll know very little about the apocalypse, the CS, Magic, leylines, or the general way things work now, and I'm planning on developing those notions slowly with run-ins with the CS, demons, etc.. I have a few ideas for early scenarios, and I'm planning on seeing where it goes from there, but I expect the majority of our first few levels to be the group deciding to go hunt for relics, or help small communities with problems.

Thanks again, and let me know if that's not specific enough.

Well, we'll see how well my answer works, then we'll know.

Okay....
Your main concern at this point, I think, is trying to figure out how to gauge what kind of threats to toss at the party, so that they can adventure without either dying or netting a loss profit-wise.
The short answer is that there is NO set formula, because in Rifts (even more than other games) how the group plays is very important.
If they're hack-and-slashers who just attack without thinking, they're going to be in trouble, because they're going to take more damage, more often, and they're going to need to get repairs to their armor (as you noted above) or buy new armor, which is expensive- often more expensive than the rewards for an adventure.
Unless you work it into the plot.

So you have a group here who is just starting out, trying to make a name for themselves. They're not a big outfit, but you can throw them a bone here or there.
What I would recommend is lowballing everything to start with. I'd even toss them up against some SDC foes, just to see how they react. If they're cool with blowing melon-sized holes in people, that'll tell you something about the group's personality. If they think things through a bit more, and think about the emotional consequences for killing people that kind of way, that'll tell you something else.
What you want, initially, is to try to get a bead on how competent they are, and what the personalities are.
The easiest way to do that is to roll up some generic monsters from the back of the original Rifts book (not in RUE, unfortunately), or from Creatures of Chaos, or just make up something low-powered, and have the party put up agains them.
Whatever armor the party has, make sure the enemy has significantly less MDC, by a difference of 10 or more.
Whatever weapons the party has, make sure that the enemy has significantly less firepower, by several d6 or more.
Give them an easy win, or a series of easy wins... or, rather, a series of what appears to be easy wins.
Because in Rifts, it can be deceptive.
If an adventurer has 40 MDC in his armor, and he takes 8 MD during a battle, his instincts will be that he's had an easy win- he still has 32 MDC left, after all.
BUT since he has to have his armor repaired, and that takes both money and access to the right facilities (as a rule), appearances can be deceiving.
Because 4 more "easy" victories like the one above, and that character is DEAD.

So to start off, to sum up, you're going to get the mix wrong. There are just too many variables. You're going to either err on the side of caution, or err on the side of a total party kill.
Given that, err on the side of caution; lowball things.
They should still have some fun.
BUT write into the story a further way to lowball things: give them free armor repairs (and E-Clip recharges) for the mission.
Have a town, or a company, or some other entity of means hire them, somebody/something that can afford the cost of repairs and recharges, and have that be part of the payment for the mission.
Like in the old PI movies/shows, where the detective mentions his bill as "$x00 per day, plus expenses."
That's a pretty plum job, but be generous at first.
Let them get their armor damaged a bit, let them get it repaired for free.
Let them blow through some ammo, let them get it replenished for free.
But point out to them that if they didn't have such a cushy mission, things would be very different.
Let them know that if they lost X MDC during the mission, they'd normally need Y credits to pay for it. Ditto with ammo.
Let them see the potential issues with Rifts adventuring, but without paying the price initially.

Then slowly work their way up to harder stuff.

If you don't have the original Rifts Book, or Creatures of Chaos, here's some general stats for random supernatural monsters to have them run into at low levels:
1d4x10 MDC
1d6-2d6 damage per attack
Maybe some kind of at-will spell or supernatural ability.
Include one kind of weakness (SDC does MD, MD does x2 damage), like silver, wood, energy, whatever, or have the monster be afraid of it's own reflection or something.

For bandits and such, I'd recommend checking out my home-brewed Raiders and Barbarians. They're low-powered threats that might do some damage to mega-damage heroes, but shouldn't pose a real threat unless they're in large numbers.

I can't give you specifics, because not only do I not know what kind of armor and weapons your party has, I don't know their playing style.
If they're "let's just rush in and start shooting/stabbing" types, then they're going to take more damage more often, and probably die.
If they're "let's sneak up, make a coordinated ambush with concentrated firepower" types, then they're going to take less damage, less often.
So whether or not a specific foe is a Minor Threat or a Major Threat is kind of up in the air.
But award XP accordingly. If the party nearly gets killed by a lone Flooper, that's a Major Threat. If they snuff an Ancient Dragon without blinking, that's a Minor Threat.

Does that help any?

[dragonfett]

Hello,

I'm starting a rifts game up soon (4 player's + myself) and I'm having trouble finding any guidelines on how to balance early encounters, and how to reward players with loot. My concern is that I'm going to make the first level too difficult, shred everyone's M.D.C. armor, and then have to tell them that they're going to need to fork out 20k+ credits to get a new suit.

You could allow armour of ithan scrolls to be fairly common and cheap to buy - give the available scrolls the amount of MDC you think they'd need. They just need to remember to read them before fighting! That's by the book, but not really hinted at in the setting.

I've talked about a sort of house ruled solution over here, where maybe you can find pieces of dinosaur bone, MDC ruins, ecomancer armour scraps, stuff like that and use that to patch a few points of damage on your armour.

Other than that or the scrolls or very convenient mages who know a mend the broken spell and will do it for the price of a drink, there really isn't a solution - income is unlikely to match expenditure on armour repairs.

And now, great, I can have the same argument with Killer Cyborg as I did before, where he assumes the problem is just that going to town to get the armour is the bother, rather than the problem being that either you don't have 20k or soon wont!

Considering that plunder (not even including body armor) from a six man squad whi each have a rifle and sidearm could easily be in the 50-75k credits range... Up to you.

Can you tell me how much you sell loot for at the black market in your game? It's not the unmodified book price, is it? When by the book it's more like 10% of the listed black market price (for undamaged gear).

I thought that scrolls were supposed to be relatively rare. Not to mention that you have to have the skill Literacy in the language that the scroll was written in to even be able to use it.

[Akashic Soldier]

I don't know if THIS will help or not. I never finished it but you get the idea.

I based the numbers off the average weekly salary and surveys showing how much of their money the average American typically carries with them at any one time.

[Noon]

I thought that scrolls were supposed to be relatively rare.

You'd have to show me the definition of rare.

Gold is rare. Yet there's shops in town that sell it that are easy enough to find.

Not to mention that you have to have the skill Literacy in the language that the scroll was written in to even be able to use it.

Not sure what you mean? It'd only matter if for some reason the scroll wasn't in english (or the PC's language) and the player didn't pick literacy (OR if no one in the group picked literacy)

[Noon]

In short: I'm making my players work really hard to get things so that they feel more like "Wait, wait, wait, this thing is a LIGHT SABRE?!!!?? OMG OMG THIS IS SO AWESOME" when their character pick up a wilks torch. Instead of going "the wilks energy pistol in RUE is pointless. why would ANYONE buy one of these, they are obviously pathetically inferior to hundreds of other energy pistols that are cheaper or better or more common or not hated by the coalition"

Why do you want to do this? Why give them the illusion of being cool with mathematically inferior weapons instead of letting them be cool with mathematically superior weapons?

Why is thinking you're superior when you're actually inferior a long-term campaign goal?

Because your weapons are always inferior to someone elses. It's just a matter of to whom.

Unless in your game you make sure no one has anything better than the PC's - then you're right in as much as you do that in your game.

[Daeglan]

I don't know if THIS will help or not. I never finished it but you get the idea.

I based the numbers off the average weekly salary and surveys showing how much of their money the average American typically carries with them at any one time.

You should submit that to the Rifter. That is a REALLY handy tool.

[dragonfett]

I thought that scrolls were supposed to be relatively rare.

You'd have to show me the definition of rare.

Gold is rare. Yet there's shops in town that sell it that are easy enough to find.

Not to mention that you have to have the skill Literacy in the language that the scroll was written in to even be able to use it.

Not sure what you mean? It'd only matter if for some reason the scroll wasn't in english (or the PC's language) and the player didn't pick literacy (OR if no one in the group picked literacy)

RUE p. 191, first actual paragraph that starts on the page.

Magic Scrolls are extremely uncommon on Rifts Earth. One reason is that most people, including many practitioners of magic, are illiterate (about 70%). Another is that few are skilled enough or willing to write a spell invocation down for fear other mages will learn the spell from the scroll.

Scroll magic is slightly different because it has a certain amount of magic built right into it. However, a literate mage has a chance of learning spells by translating scrolls. Base Skill: 10% +2% per level of experience. Note that the spell id instantly activated the moment it is read aloud and then the words disappear or turn into gibberish or a magic symbol.

[Noon]

See, that's the funny thing between the author making that setting fluff and the author making character classes who's skill options are 'Technical: Any'.

I don't know if you and your players feel obliged to roll percentile and if they get under 70%, they wont let themselves take literacy as a skill. If so, well if your group enjoys that that's great, but it's not exactly an argument as to how the ruleset works.

And of course no ley line walkers are going to know armour of ithan already, given it's low level, well within their starting spell range, etc. Oooh, wouldn't want that knowledge getting out!

That text would both make a scroll of anihilation and a scroll of globe of daylight both equally 'extremely uncommon', both with the exact same fear of 'letting the knowledge out'. Such an excluded middle.

But if you've got a solution to paying for armour repairs which isn't a multi paragraph and doesn't simply add in house rules so as to try and sustain this fluff text, I'll listen. Ahh, though I'm predicting 'wealthy patron/boss' will come up.

In the end it depends on whether you're willing to trade off part of the fiction/fluff text in order to grease the wheels of actual play. I am - I don't find fluff that contradicts the rule structure and has no middle ground really needs to be treated as sacrosanct, when gameplay, like with the OP's problem, can be helped along.

[Noon]

Feel free to come back latter and tell us how the game went, DocShock! We'd love to hear it!

[dragonfett]

See, that's the funny thing between the author making that setting fluff and the author making character classes who's skill options are 'Technical: Any'.

I don't know if you and your players feel obliged to roll percentile and if they get under 70%, they wont let themselves take literacy as a skill. If so, well if your group enjoys that that's great, but it's not exactly an argument as to how the ruleset works.

And of course no ley line walkers are going to know armour of ithan already, given it's low level, well within their starting spell range, etc. Oooh, wouldn't want that knowledge getting out!

That text would both make a scroll of anihilation and a scroll of globe of daylight both equally 'extremely uncommon', both with the exact same fear of 'letting the knowledge out'. Such an excluded middle.

But if you've got a solution to paying for armour repairs which isn't a multi paragraph and doesn't simply add in house rules so as to try and sustain this fluff text, I'll listen. Ahh, though I'm predicting 'wealthy patron/boss' will come up.

In the end it depends on whether you're willing to trade off part of the fiction/fluff text in order to grease the wheels of actual play. I am - I don't find fluff that contradicts the rule structure and has no middle ground really needs to be treated as sacrosanct, when gameplay, like with the OP's problem, can be helped along.

You see, the way I would play it is that only scrolls of level 7 and below would be found with any regularity (with level 1 scrolls being the most common and level 7 being found once in a blue moon).

And as far as magic OCC's that don't start with Literacy, Elemental Fusionist's and Ley Line Walkers do not start with Literacy as a OCC or OCC related skill (although they can take it if they wish as a secondary skill (EF's get four, LLW's get 6, and Literacy is now a Communication skill, btw).

[eliakon]

See, that's the funny thing between the author making that setting fluff and the author making character classes who's skill options are 'Technical: Any'.

I don't know if you and your players feel obliged to roll percentile and if they get under 70%, they wont let themselves take literacy as a skill. If so, well if your group enjoys that that's great, but it's not exactly an argument as to how the ruleset works.

And of course no ley line walkers are going to know armour of ithan already, given it's low level, well within their starting spell range, etc. Oooh, wouldn't want that knowledge getting out!

That text would both make a scroll of anihilation and a scroll of globe of daylight both equally 'extremely uncommon', both with the exact same fear of 'letting the knowledge out'. Such an excluded middle.

But if you've got a solution to paying for armour repairs which isn't a multi paragraph and doesn't simply add in house rules so as to try and sustain this fluff text, I'll listen. Ahh, though I'm predicting 'wealthy patron/boss' will come up.

In the end it depends on whether you're willing to trade off part of the fiction/fluff text in order to grease the wheels of actual play. I am - I don't find fluff that contradicts the rule structure and has no middle ground really needs to be treated as sacrosanct, when gameplay, like with the OP's problem, can be helped along.

only 15% of humans are 'mutants' and psionics are classed as a mutation....that doesnt mean that a pc must roll under 15 to play a burster....just that their character is part of the 15%. Even if every PC everywhere was literate, they would STILL be in the 30% that are, not the 70% that arnt.....Now that we have clairified the 30%, we have to go back to what is the object of making scrolls for that 30%. They will want to benifit somehow, (profit, promote a philosiphy, upset the CS what ever it is that drives them). I have run games where quite a few 'rare' spells are common as scrolls, due to factions TRYING to get what they think 'the average mage should know' out there. So yes, AoI scrolls can work, but they are still going to need a literate mage with scroll to make, and a literate person to read.

[Noon]

I don't know if I understand Mickey's approach, but I thought he was refering to savouring each tier of weapons for awhile, before going onto the next tier. I try to have that myself - at first they savour having an M-16 over a crappy saturdaynight special, then they think a vibro blade or 1D6 MD laser pistol is so amazing, then we move onto 3D6 weaponry, and so on.

Making all the weapons get some love and appreciation.

Instead of players picking the 1D6*10+10 pulse rifle and treating everything else as nothing.

It's much like when you get your first +1 sword in D&D and you savour it, so latter on even when you're using +4 swords, you still remember how a +1 was good.

But if you just skip straight to +4, then +4 is the new +1.

[nilgravity]

I say make a good story. Make sure there's at least one way for the characters to survive, even if it's that they are fast enough to run away (though the players tend to think of a way out that you did not think of). If players die they can make new characters or become in debt of a necromancer. Don't approach it like a video game developer, worrying about power progression, let the story come first.

[Noon]

I think someone saying to let the story come first is rather like saying to have the music come first, ahead of the condition of the musical instrument. It's like saying no matter how many strings are out of tune or even snapped, no matter if frame of the instrument is broken and beholed (where there are meant to be no holes), let the music come first...

If you take it you have to patch together an 'instrument' out of the rules, then if you patch together a video game progression, you atleast have a kind of instrument to work with.

[nilgravity]

You should focus more on my last sentence than my first.


PS in response to the OP I found this on the Rifts webring
http://users.comcen.com.au/~easy/neonrift/foelvls.htm

[Noon]

You should focus more on my last sentence than my first.

I did.

PS in response to the OP I found this on the Rifts webring
http://users.comcen.com.au/~easy/neonrift/foelvls.htm

And strangely you've just linked to a site I made a long time ago (and sadly no longer have access to - got it with a dial up plan, shifted plans which don't actually include a web page as well, forgot the password and suspect they'll erase the page if I ask)

I should put up the encounter tables I have now, on a site at some point. Just need to figure how I'll fine tune the SDC side of it first, though.

Anyway, it was strange to be argued, then quoted, by turns.

[Zamion138]

I don't know if I understand Mickey's approach, but I thought he was refering to savouring each tier of weapons for awhile, before going onto the next tier. I try to have that myself - at first they savour having an M-16 over a crappy saturdaynight special, then they think a vibro blade or 1D6 MD laser pistol is so amazing, then we move onto 3D6 weaponry, and so on.

That's reasonable. I thought he was saying, "I'm going to offer +1 swords and +2 swords, but the +1 swords will look awesome and have history and outsiders will think the people who use them are neat-o, and the +2 swords will be just, like, swords." I found that counterintuitive.

Right.

Here's some crap, but it's Shakespeare. Here's something awesome but it's pedantic crap. Dance for me, role play to amuse me.

Not sure who would play like that, but I doubt they have a very popular campaign.

All I'm saying (or usually ever am) is that the GM should "hand out" items/weapons/armor/etc. based on the balance for the campaign.

So while my players can read about super awesome Gigadamage weapons, their CHARACTERS won't have access to that kind of stuff normally, unless what they are doing in the world happens to be something that drives them to necessity.

Sort of how most of us reading this don't have ACCESS to a silenced sniper rifle with an ACOG sight. They exist and are very cool, but it would be way more convenient for me to figure out a way to handle my problems other than with a silenced sniper rifle with an ACOG sight.

It solves about 98% of the "problems" people have with an MDC setting. I'm the GM, so when my players complain about everything in the books being MDC I gently remind them that I have more control over what happens in the campaign than the people who wrote the Rifts books, even if everything in the campaign happens to come out of the Rifts books and follows the Rifts rules.


There.

Not to be a jerk but why would you put an ACOG on a Sniper rifle?
And it would only cost you a 200 transfer tax more than the parts and thats for the "silencer" or suppressor. other wise no "sniper rifle" is banned anywhere in the US. (maybe DC)

[Daeglan]

Have a notebook full of NPCs. Have low level to high level of various OCC's make up a few different load outs for them...

Build a few squads of CS troops. of various levels and types with a few different load outs.

Build them based on what is appropriate for the region your party is in. One thing i have noticed is Rifts needs a bit prep as very few of the monsters or individuals is ready to go.

Strip out any named NPCs and drop them in this folder as well.

Build out several of the various monsters so they are ready go as well.

[glitterboy2098]

Hello,

I'm starting a rifts game up soon (4 player's + myself) and I'm having trouble finding any guidelines on how to balance early encounters, and how to reward players with loot. My concern is that I'm going to make the first level too difficult, shred everyone's M.D.C. armor, and then have to tell them that they're going to need to fork out 20k+ credits to get a new suit. If I have 4 characters (crazy, headhunter, techno-wizard, rogue scholar) with pretty standard starting gear, what should the bad guys in a reasonably difficult first level be? I'm okay at filling in the story, traps, puzzles, etc., but what should an encounter look like? What should an early boss fight look like? I realize that there's probably not really a right answer here, but I'm ideally looking for rough information like

Encounter 1:
X NPCs Each with:
X M.D.C. Armor
X Attacks/Melee
+X Bonuses to Strike/Parry/Dodge
Weapons that do XD6 MD

Any rewards beyond what they scavenge off of these guys?

Thanks in advance.

DocShock

for the first few encounters, your going to want to not make things too hard, nor give too much to them as booty. Monster's and animals are a good option, though you don't want to throw too many at them or you'll give the wrong impression of the environment.

for human type opposition, i'd suggest your basic bandit groups. a group of (level 1D4) bandits (basically HTH basic, one or two WP each, maybe a pilot truck or something for a few of them, and not much need for skills beyond that), armed with basic Assualt rifles (M-16 or AK-47 type stuff) loaded with Ramjet Rounds. this would let them do 1D4md on a short burst of 3 rounds and 1D6 on a long burst of 5 rounds. give each one a couple magazines of ammo. improvised body armor (made from bits of salvaged armor, MDC leather, MDC tire tread, etc) in the 20-30 MDC range for protections. give a few of them with better gear to add uniqueness.
those bandits are just the Mooks, there to give the players something to distract them from the real opponents, the bandit leader and his flunky's in light EBA and armed with real MDC weapons like laser rifles. feel free to toss in some psychic powers or magic if you want to give them a bit of a challenge. depending on your plot, you could put them in some MDC converted trucks or other simple vehicles with improvised armor and weapons. mad-max type stuff.

now, i wouldn't throw these at them all at once .. work it so they encounter a small group of mooks at a time. start with small group at first, give them a chance to get the hang of the combat system without a major danger of death. then throw a slightly larger group at them the next time, maybe with a few basic energy weapons, so the danger goes up. stretch this out as much as you need for your adventures plot. the final battle should be a real challenge to the group, but not too much of one. this is where you bust out the enemies with special abilities or gear.
if they defeat the early groups too fast, you can adjust the bandit's levels, gear, or numbers upwards in later groups to make it more of a challenge.

by the end of this you should have a good idea of what kind of fighting ability your group has and how tough you need to make their opponents, and they won't have gained any weapons with too much power. they'd have a number of SDC guns, a supply of ramjet ammo, and might be able to piece together some light body armor.
just make sure you give them some good non-weapon rewards along the way, so they do get something of use from the adventure. with bandits you could come away with food and supplies, credits, some bits of jewelry and other valuable non-money goods. stuff the group could use later to trade for stuff they need.

[Zamion138]

Hello,

I'm starting a rifts game up soon (4 player's + myself) and I'm having trouble finding any guidelines on how to balance early encounters, and how to reward players with loot. My concern is that I'm going to make the first level too difficult, shred everyone's M.D.C. armor, and then have to tell them that they're going to need to fork out 20k+ credits to get a new suit. If I have 4 characters (crazy, headhunter, techno-wizard, rogue scholar) with pretty standard starting gear, what should the bad guys in a reasonably difficult first level be? I'm okay at filling in the story, traps, puzzles, etc., but what should an encounter look like? What should an early boss fight look like? I realize that there's probably not really a right answer here, but I'm ideally looking for rough information like

Encounter 1:
X NPCs Each with:
X M.D.C. Armor
X Attacks/Melee
+X Bonuses to Strike/Parry/Dodge
Weapons that do XD6 MD

Any rewards beyond what they scavenge off of these guys?

Thanks in advance.

DocShock

for the first few encounters, your going to want to not make things too hard, nor give too much to them as booty. Monster's and animals are a good option, though you don't want to throw too many at them or you'll give the wrong impression of the environment.

for human type opposition, i'd suggest your basic bandit groups. a group of (level 1D4) bandits (basically HTH basic, one or two WP each, maybe a pilot truck or something for a few of them, and not much need for skills beyond that), armed with basic Assualt rifles (M-16 or AK-47 type stuff) loaded with Ramjet Rounds. this would let them do 1D4md on a short burst of 3 rounds and 1D6 on a long burst of 5 rounds. give each one a couple magazines of ammo. improvised body armor (made from bits of salvaged armor, MDC leather, MDC tire tread, etc) in the 20-30 MDC range for protections. give a few of them with better gear to add uniqueness.
those bandits are just the Mooks, there to give the players something to distract them from the real opponents, the bandit leader and his flunky's in light EBA and armed with real MDC weapons like laser rifles. feel free to toss in some psychic powers or magic if you want to give them a bit of a challenge. depending on your plot, you could put them in some MDC converted trucks or other simple vehicles with improvised armor and weapons. mad-max type stuff.

now, i wouldn't throw these at them all at once .. work it so they encounter a small group of mooks at a time. start with small group at first, give them a chance to get the hang of the combat system without a major danger of death. then throw a slightly larger group at them the next time, maybe with a few basic energy weapons, so the danger goes up. stretch this out as much as you need for your adventures plot. the final battle should be a real challenge to the group, but not too much of one. this is where you bust out the enemies with special abilities or gear.
if they defeat the early groups too fast, you can adjust the bandit's levels, gear, or numbers upwards in later groups to make it more of a challenge.

by the end of this you should have a good idea of what kind of fighting ability your group has and how tough you need to make their opponents, and they won't have gained any weapons with too much power. they'd have a number of SDC guns, a supply of ramjet ammo, and might be able to piece together some light body armor.
just make sure you give them some good non-weapon rewards along the way, so they do get something of use from the adventure. with bandits you could come away with food and supplies, credits, some bits of jewelry and other valuable non-money goods. stuff the group could use later to trade for stuff they need.

Best advice so far honestly, lets them see mdc is rare but you cant judge a book by its cover,ie ak 47s become a bit more reggued when loaded with modern ammo. Its not about what they get for the kill.......but why they are killing.

[Noon]

Or as I'd put it, don't decide they'll have combat for them, leave that choice to them. Maybe there is some way around combat they can discover or see, which might not be as profitable, but then again it's not as potentially deadly!

Players know when the GM made them have a fight, they wont die - because the GM just forced them into the fight.

When players know they could have chosen to avoided the fight but are in it all the same, they start getting scared!

[Akashic Soldier]

If you were a potential player in my campaign I would have discussed the power level and explained to you that, based on the other players, I intend to run a very low level campaign. If you then insisted on not being able to enjoy such a thing either 1) You would be respectfully declined as a member of the player party or 2) I would change the campaign to suit your tastes as a player.

As you are not a potential candidate for the player party for this campaign, why would you take any exception to the limits I place on player characters?

I don't know of any GM that can run a compelling campaign without limiting the OCCs/RCCs/PCC equipment, magic, and TW items in some way shape or form.

The bottom line is that I don't play "Rifts: I'm the referee so if it's in the books you can have it, do it, and go there. Ready, set... roll dice."

I play "Rifts: This is the campaign we are running. It starts like this. What happens next is up to you. Here are some obvious paths. Here are some logical choices. Here are lots and lots and lots of opportunities for adventure."

You are a Game Master after my own heart Knox.

Rifts isn't like a lot of other RPGs, it has "themes" and invisible tiers of power. Like you, I "force" (*gasp*) my players to start out weak so over the course of the game they can become awesome. I was inspired to do this by the Batman: Year One example in the R:UE on what it means to be a 1st level character. A lot of people don't like it. A lot of people complain and refused to play in my game thinking that would sway me to change, but in the end I was better off without them playing in the first place.

Last week, my players pulled together for the first time in the new game I am running (click on the dino in my signature) and I was so proud of them. It was a milestone and the way everything unfolded was just monumental and very fitting. If I let everyone start out as a God able to topple dinosaurs with their bare hands than those last two games NEVER could have happened... and worse... how would the characters ever age/improve without eclipsing the rest of the game world?

[Noon]

Hey_I_Can_Chan, I don't understand, really - if it takes a SAMAS to beat the big bad, then you're essentially saying 'if I choose a SAMAS pilot, I should be able to just beat the game instantly because of that choice!'

Or you want the GM to scale the big bad to be even bigger - which is the same deal as your index card thing - a SAMAS becomes the new index card character, which you'll just have to build up from. And the GM has to do all that just because you say you have to be able to choose a SAMAS pilot. As said, the best you've got is to complain of bait and switch, but if the incremental power increase has been explained, then that's no arguement.

Many GM's are also exhausted of scalling up a boss, simply because the players really wanted to choose this or that. Both ways, index card to character sheet, or player insisted on class X so scale up the boss, end up being exhausting.

If wanting to start out as a SAMAS pilot seems the most innocent thing in the world and only a GM that starts you low down is the bad thing - well no, actually both can be just as bad as the other. Neither side is the perfect victim and everything should revolve around them or something.

[Nightmask]

All I'm saying (or usually ever am) is that the GM should "hand out" items/weapons/armor/etc. based on the balance for the campaign.

So while my players can read about super awesome Gigadamage weapons, their CHARACTERS won't have access to that kind of stuff normally, unless what they are doing in the world happens to be something that drives them to necessity.

Huh. Okay. So all that cool stuff in the books, they can't have?

I just reread what you posted before where you said...

This may not work for most campaigns, as in my campaign I have a character that is a Coalition RPA Elite and it's going to be a long time before they can even come close to actually having the Power Armor. That's going to be one of my "EUREKA" moments that I'm going to make feel like a giant video game CUTSCENE to that character. After scrapping and fighting and surviving on wits alone they will FINALLY feel like the hero they wanted to in the first place when they climb into that SAMAS and fire up the systems.

...And I realize that this is just a different game than I want to play. Were I to sit down at a Rifts game and roll up a Coalition Power Armor Elite pilot and then be told, "No, you won't get power armor for a while, but when you do, it'll be awesome," I'd roll up something that would instead let me be awesome now. Rifts totally has those, and I'm pretty sure that if I wanted to play a mind melter, you wouldn't say, "No, you won't get psionics for a while, but when you do, it'll be awesome." That, to me, is no less weird.

I'm not saying you're playing wrong or that your fun isn't really fun or anything. I'm just saying I don't think I could even process a Rifts game like the one you describe. I've played metric craptons of fragile 1st level characters struggling to graduate from index card to real character sheets who never got to the cool stuff, and I've grown exausted with that.

So, yeah, rock on. All the best. And I hope your campaign lasts long enough for that RPA Elite pilot to actually use his power armor. Otherwise, that player's being punished for your ambition. He's given up power now in exchange for power later, and if there's no later it's an unfair trade.

I think therein lies the difference in opinion: You've played numerous 1st level characters and gotten tired of trying to reach the desired power levels. (I paraphrase)

My players have not.

There may be those who think that it would be way cooler if Luke Skywalker walked in screen for the first scene of episode 4 in full on Jedi Master mode and always had his full potential. I feel it's a better story because we all got to see this normal farm boy turn into this awesome jedi over the course of three movies.

However, if my Star Wars loving friends come over, chances are I'd rather watch episode 3 or 6 with them. I've seen them all 100 times and my favorite scenes are in those two.

When you've seen Young Obi Wan barely wave his hand and toss an enemy droid out of the way as a mere afterthought it isn't so impressive to see Luke Skywalker straining his face red trying to keep tiny little Yoda floating in mid air.

So I suppose that, as a player you may want to be "Jedi Luke" right now and wield all that power, and that's fine. I feel like a campaign geared towards letting my players go from the farm boy who can't believe his eyes when he sees a light saber to the guy dressed in black who keeps his cool in front of the notorious gangster in the entire canon (Jabba, for those playing at home)... is a pretty awesome idea.

They seem to agree with me and have a lot of interest in getting started.

Which, as a GM, is the direction I tend to go in: One that I think my players will enjoy the most.


To argue why you wouldn't want to play in my campaign, as an experienced player, doesn't really seem to serve any purpose other than to purport your opinion on the matter and simply use mine as a loosely related antithesis of yours.

If you were a potential player in my campaign I would have discussed the power level and explained to you that, based on the other players, I intend to run a very low level campaign. If you then insisted on not being able to enjoy such a thing either 1) You would be respectfully declined as a member of the player party or 2) I would change the campaign to suit your tastes as a player.

As you are not a potential candidate for the player party for this campaign, why would you take any exception to the limits I place on player characters?

I don't know of any GM that can run a compelling campaign without limiting the OCCs/RCCs/PCC equipment, magic, and TW items in some way shape or form.

The bottom line is that I don't play "Rifts: I'm the referee so if it's in the books you can have it, do it, and go there. Ready, set... roll dice."

I play "Rifts: This is the campaign we are running. It starts like this. What happens next is up to you. Here are some obvious paths. Here are some logical choices. Here are lots and lots and lots of opportunities for adventure."

Except he's got a point, a power armor pilot without power armor isn't a power armor pilot and is like a Ley Line Walker with no spells 'but you'll get to learn some great ones a few years from now!'. When other players get to have what makes their character's core concept work and you don't that's not going to make for a happy player. He's going to end up bitter and resentful because everyone else is getting to play what they want and he isn't, and he's going to be in the right to complain about it.

Your analogy is also flawed because it's not a case of wanting to start as a Jedi Knight all fully trained and having to 'work up' as it were to it from a farm boy, it's a case of the trained power armor pilot hearing 'no power armor for you!' while watching the party's Ley Line Walker or Mind Melter having full access to the spells or psi-powers related to their fields. So while they're showing off and having a cool time of it the power armor guy's left unable to do much of anything, certainly he can't shine as what he is, a power armor pilot.

[Noon]

I really don't imagine mickey fails to give a warning that, when someone picks out a power armour pilot, they will start with no PA if they do.

That's all a 'the player will be really unhappy' argument has to go on - that a bait and switch happened. Which I'm guessing just isn't present.

Without the bait and switch issue, no, the player isn't in the right to complain about it.

[Daeglan]

I really don't imagine mickey fails to give a warning that, when someone picks out a power armour pilot, they will start with no PA if they do.

That's all a 'the player will be really unhappy' argument has to go on - that a bait and switch happened. Which I'm guessing just isn't present.

Without the bait and switch issue, no, the player isn't in the right to complain about it.

since the OCC writes ups for them gives them power armor that is a really dick move. Seeing as how you have just rendered that player moot.

[Akashic Soldier]

since the OCC writes ups for them gives them power armor that is a really dick move. Seeing as how you have just rendered that player moot.

I do tend to agree with this. I think there are PLENTY of ways to "control" a power-mad robot pilot without De-Botting them. For instance, simply making repair difficult or giving it due attention (see Rifts: Sourcebook 1, revised) will give a 'Bot pilot a moment to think before they strap in and rush out there guns-a-blazing! When suddenly you realize that 1 M.D.C. = 1,200 credits and you need a factory workshop/repair facility to be able to fix the 'Bot then you start getting smart, or you die along with your 'Bot.

[Noon]

since the OCC writes ups for them gives them power armor that is a really dick move. Seeing as how you have just rendered that player moot.

Totally. After telling him it was like that before he joined the campaign and given him a choice on a different class, it didn't matter because someone had a gun to his head that he had to play AND choose a PA class. So he had to join and be moot. Totally.

If you want to pitch that you HAVE to include all your buds who want to play regardless of restrictions you state, no matter what they wanna choose, hey, pitch it. It's a valid pitch.

Otherwise, no, not a dick move. At all. Impolite to suggest such a thing.

[Daeglan]

since the OCC writes ups for them gives them power armor that is a really dick move. Seeing as how you have just rendered that player moot.

Totally. After telling him it was like that before he joined the campaign and given him a choice on a different class, it didn't matter because someone had a gun to his head that he had to play AND choose a PA class. So he had to join and be moot. Totally.

If you want to pitch that you HAVE to include all your buds who want to play regardless of restrictions you state, no matter what they wanna choose, hey, pitch it. It's a valid pitch.

Otherwise, no, not a dick move. At all. Impolite to suggest such a thing.

Telling a player yeah you can play this class but I am going to render it moot is still a dick move. It would be like saying "Yeah you can play a Ley Line walker but you can't have any spells.Or sure you can play a tattoo man but have no tattoos." Telling a player you can play a class but i am going to render you moot is a dick move. No matter what class you are talking about.

[Killer Cyborg]

I really don't imagine mickey fails to give a warning that, when someone picks out a power armour pilot, they will start with no PA if they do.

That's all a 'the player will be really unhappy' argument has to go on - that a bait and switch happened. Which I'm guessing just isn't present.

Without the bait and switch issue, no, the player isn't in the right to complain about it.

since the OCC writes ups for them gives them power armor that is a really dick move. Seeing as how you have just rendered that player moot.

If a character is rendered moot because of the loss of one trick, then the character isn't much of a character, just a one-trick pony.

[Zamion138]

I really don't imagine mickey fails to give a warning that, when someone picks out a power armour pilot, they will start with no PA if they do.

That's all a 'the player will be really unhappy' argument has to go on - that a bait and switch happened. Which I'm guessing just isn't present.

Without the bait and switch issue, no, the player isn't in the right to complain about it.

since the OCC writes ups for them gives them power armor that is a really dick move. Seeing as how you have just rendered that player moot.

If a character is rendered moot because of the loss of one trick, then the character isn't much of a character, just a one-trick pony.

The one trick your refering to is their main skill, its a cyber knight with out psionics,a mage with out spells, sure he can sense the location of leylines but not use them. Its a juicer with outs drugs, its not a one trick pony type deal, its saying sure you can be a pa pilot, go ahead and pick what your elite piloting skills go to, ok now pick your gear and lets make all of thoose pointless now for a few levels (wich in most peoples games is a long time.)

If you told some one they could be a cyborg and go for it but you cant have any weapon systems and were going to be running a most astral campaign you would be doing the same thing as allowing a pa pilot and then taking his one and only power away. Hes not a good fighter hes not overly skilled, hes not rich hes not anything but great at suiting up and being a pilot.

[Noon]

Telling a player yeah you can play this class but I am going to render it moot is still a dick move. It would be like saying "Yeah you can play a Ley Line walker but you can't have any spells.Or sure you can play a tattoo man but have no tattoos." Telling a player you can play a class but i am going to render you moot is a dick move. No matter what class you are talking about.

No, I can't really see any principle that's an issue there - toward the end you paint it as if it's about targeting a player and reduce that particular players class powers, no matter what class they choose. That sort of singling out has nothing to do with the subject though.

I'm not seeing anything dickish, all I can see is that someone said No.

To me roleplay seems to be within the rest of real life - in real life, you don't always get what you want. Though beneficially and unlike life, you aren't forced to play in any particular campaign.

[Nightmask]

Telling a player yeah you can play this class but I am going to render it moot is still a dick move. It would be like saying "Yeah you can play a Ley Line walker but you can't have any spells.Or sure you can play a tattoo man but have no tattoos." Telling a player you can play a class but i am going to render you moot is a dick move. No matter what class you are talking about.

No, I can't really see any principle that's an issue there - toward the end you paint it as if it's about targeting a player and reduce that particular players class powers, no matter what class they choose. That sort of singling out has nothing to do with the subject though.

I'm not seeing anything dickish, all I can see is that someone said No.

To me roleplay seems to be within the rest of life - you don't always get what you want. Though beneficially and unlike life, you aren't forced to play.

No, it's denying a particular player what actually makes that player's choice of character's worthless while one would never think to say something like 'yeah you're a mage but you've got no spells but maybe someday I'll let you have one and you'd better be happy I did'. When your response is 'oh no those classes over there require those things to play them so they get them but that class you want doesn't really require what makes that class that class so you can forget about getting what it requires' is wrong. I mean seriously, it's a power armor pilot I can't see how anyone would insist that it would be acceptable for a GM to tell the player that his power armor pilot can't have power armor but the Mind Melter gets his psionics and the Ley Line Walker gets his spells and so on.

[Noon]

Hey_I_Can_Chan, I don't understand, really - if it takes a SAMAS to beat the big bad, then you're essentially saying 'if I choose a SAMAS pilot, I should be able to just beat the game instantly because of that choice!'

I'm not sure what this means. Seriously.

There should be more to the campaign than one bad guy threatening one player. I don't get this at all.

Well that's uncharitable reading. As if what I said doesn't already cover a SAMAS shooting another or a number of other bad guys before carving their way to a big bad.

What does it take to beat the big bad (or big bads, plural, the amount of them doesn't really matter - more of them are the same as one big bad who's tougher) in campaigns you've played in?

I'm guessing equipment doesn't make a difference in how your campaigns are run - getting more powerful doesn't get you closer to taking out any big threat, instead you have to get through a series of investigations to do so, interspersed with carefully balanced fights that are tailored to the exact PC load out. Which is to say, when the GM deems the investigation phase has gone on long enough, then you can beat the big threat.

Or tell me, if it's not by gaining more powerful gear OR investigation, how do you confront the big climax in the campaigns you play in? What happened in the last Rifts campaign you played?

[Noon]

No, it's denying a particular player what actually makes that player's choice of character's worthless while one would never think to say something like 'yeah you're a mage but you've got no spells but maybe someday I'll let you have one and you'd better be happy I did'. When your response is 'oh no those classes over there require those things to play them so they get them but that class you want doesn't really require what makes that class that class so you can forget about getting what it requires' is wrong. I mean seriously, it's a power armor pilot I can't see how anyone would insist that it would be acceptable for a GM to tell the player that his power armor pilot can't have power armor but the Mind Melter gets his psionics and the Ley Line Walker gets his spells and so on.

Still not seeing it?

Are you saying if a GM says "In my next campaign you can only play LLW's, mystics, mind melters and shifters", then he's being a dick? Some player can come up and go "I choose a PA pilot!" "But that's not on my list of what I want to GM" "OH YOU BIG DICK!"

Personally that sounds like a very self entitled feeling player, to me.

Still not seeing the thing you are owed, but you are not recieving. I played in D&D once as a cleric - and the GM had made a setting where undead were really, really rare, thus making my turn undead pretty useless. My only problem with that was that I was told this AFTER making a cleric (after making it and playing a few times).

[Daeglan]

No, it's denying a particular player what actually makes that player's choice of character's worthless while one would never think to say something like 'yeah you're a mage but you've got no spells but maybe someday I'll let you have one and you'd better be happy I did'. When your response is 'oh no those classes over there require those things to play them so they get them but that class you want doesn't really require what makes that class that class so you can forget about getting what it requires' is wrong. I mean seriously, it's a power armor pilot I can't see how anyone would insist that it would be acceptable for a GM to tell the player that his power armor pilot can't have power armor but the Mind Melter gets his psionics and the Ley Line Walker gets his spells and so on.

Still not seeing it?

Are you saying if a GM says "In my next campaign you can only play LLW's, mystics, mind melters and shifters", then he's being a dick? Some player can come up and go "I choose a PA pilot!" "But that's not on my list of what I want to GM" "OH YOU BIG DICK!"

Personally that sounds like a very self entitled feeling player, to me.

Still not seeing the thing you are owed, but you are not recieving. I played in D&D once as a cleric - and the GM had made a setting where undead were really, really rare, thus making my turn undead pretty useless. My only problem with that was that I was told this AFTER making a cleric (after making it and playing a few times).

There is a huge difference between saying these are the classes that I am allowing and saying yes you can play a RPA but I won't allow you to have the item that actually is the core of playing an RPA. Just because the items is a piece of technology does not mean that it is any different than telling a player sure you can play a Ley Line walker. You won't start with your spells. It is a dick move. You are taking away a core ability of a class.

Your example is a bad example. Since you still have the ability. While still a dick move it is a different kind. Rendering a core ability non useful is a different kind of dick move.

[Nightmask]

No, it's denying a particular player what actually makes that player's choice of character's worthless while one would never think to say something like 'yeah you're a mage but you've got no spells but maybe someday I'll let you have one and you'd better be happy I did'. When your response is 'oh no those classes over there require those things to play them so they get them but that class you want doesn't really require what makes that class that class so you can forget about getting what it requires' is wrong. I mean seriously, it's a power armor pilot I can't see how anyone would insist that it would be acceptable for a GM to tell the player that his power armor pilot can't have power armor but the Mind Melter gets his psionics and the Ley Line Walker gets his spells and so on.

Still not seeing it?

Are you saying if a GM says "In my next campaign you can only play LLW's, mystics, mind melters and shifters", then he's being a dick? Some player can come up and go "I choose a PA pilot!" "But that's not on my list of what I want to GM" "OH YOU BIG DICK!"

Personally that sounds like a very self entitled feeling player, to me.

Still not seeing the thing you are owed, but you are not recieving. I played in D&D once as a cleric - and the GM had made a setting where undead were really, really rare, thus making my turn undead pretty useless. My only problem with that was that I was told this AFTER making a cleric (after making it and playing a few times).

There is a huge difference between saying these are the classes that I am allowing and saying yes you can play a RPA but I won't allow you to have the item that actually is the core of playing an RPA. Just because the items is a piece of technology does not mean that it is any different than telling a player sure you can play a Ley Line walker. You won't start with your spells. It is a dick move. You are taking away a core ability of a class.

Your example is a bad example. Since you still have the ability. While still a dick move it is a different kind. Rendering a core ability non useful is a different kind of dick move.

It's also a bad example because the cleric's Turn Undead ability is a very minor aspect of the character and it still had all its spell-casting ability which is what's the main concern of the cleric (particularly since depending on the incarnation and type of cleric some clerics don't even get Turn Undead but they all get spell-casting ability). You don't become a cleric because you want to turn undead you become one for the spell-casting ability (generally) and maybe because it's a good mix between combat and spell-casting.

You're definitely right that the power armor for the RPA is analogous to the spells of the LLW and the psionics of the MM, without it the character has a lot of useless skills and can't even begin to contribute to the party like the rest can. Plus given we're talking Rifts the average power armor like the SAMAS IS low power for the setting, given what else is around and unlike with the LLW or MM the armor doesn't regenerate or have the means of automatically recovering spent resources.

[Killer Cyborg]

I really don't imagine mickey fails to give a warning that, when someone picks out a power armour pilot, they will start with no PA if they do.

That's all a 'the player will be really unhappy' argument has to go on - that a bait and switch happened. Which I'm guessing just isn't present.

Without the bait and switch issue, no, the player isn't in the right to complain about it.

since the OCC writes ups for them gives them power armor that is a really dick move. Seeing as how you have just rendered that player moot.

If a character is rendered moot because of the loss of one trick, then the character isn't much of a character, just a one-trick pony.

The one trick your refering to is their main skill, its a cyber knight with out psionics, a mage with out spells,

You seem to think less of those OCCs than I do.
I'd say that the CK's main strength is that they're a KNIGHT; they're trained warriors who have mastered a variety of weapons and areas of combat.
And I'd say that a mage's main strength is his mind, not his magic. I've played mages plenty of times, and it wasn't uncommon to go a whole session without casting any spells at all.

Its a juicer with outs drugs

Not really. A power armor pilot without his PA doesn't get his stats nerfed down to about 10, nor does he have a strong chance of dying from withdrawal.

its not a one trick pony type deal, its saying sure you can be a pa pilot, go ahead and pick what your elite piloting skills go to, ok now pick your gear and lets make all of thoose pointless now for a few levels (wich in most peoples games is a long time.)

Yeah, that IS a one-trick pony type deal, if the only cool gear you picked up was your power armor.

If you told some one they could be a cyborg and go for it but you cant have any weapon systems and were going to be running a most astral campaign you would be doing the same thing as allowing a pa pilot and then taking his one and only power away.

a) The bolded portion Sounds kinda cool!
b) Wait... you just said that it's not a one-trick pony kind of thing... and now you're saying that power armor is the pilot's "one and only power."
I'll let the two of you argue out which of those is true.

Hes not a good fighter hes not overly skilled, hes not rich hes not anything but great at suiting up and being a pilot.

He starts with HTH Expert, which can be changed to MA or Assassin at the cost of 2 skills.
He gets three WPs to start, one of choice.
He gets 8 OCC Related skills at first level (6, if you boost the hand to hand, but Expert is general good enough for me).
He can take ANY communications, domestic, military, physics (except acrobatics), pilot, pilot related, technical, or weapon proficiency, skill, so that doesn't seem very limited.
He gets Dead Boy armor, which is pretty solid. He gets an energy rifle and sidearm of choice with 4 extra E-Clips for each weapon, along with a couple of grenades and some other stuff.
He gets choice of a conventional military vehicle for daily use.
He gets special equipment upon assignment.

I'm not seeing the problem.

[Nightmask]

I really don't imagine mickey fails to give a warning that, when someone picks out a power armour pilot, they will start with no PA if they do.

That's all a 'the player will be really unhappy' argument has to go on - that a bait and switch happened. Which I'm guessing just isn't present.

Without the bait and switch issue, no, the player isn't in the right to complain about it.

since the OCC writes ups for them gives them power armor that is a really dick move. Seeing as how you have just rendered that player moot.

I'm just not going to be convinced that a "player" suffers because his "character" isn't optimally equipped.


The difference between rolling up an RPA Elite and having your character start the campaign without any power armor, and being a Ley Line Walker without any spells should be obvious. If a RPA Elite trained characters happens across power armor he/she can use the SKILLS that their character has to operate the power armor.

Taking away a characters latent magic ability is ipso facto not the same thing.

There's a world of difference between being 'optimally equipped' and not having what's basic to the character concept. There's also the issue that you can't tell that a mage starting without spells and an RPA pilot starting without power armor are equivalent, you just don't seem to realize that because you think 'well it's power armor it's not really essential to a power armor pilot like spells are to mages' which is ridiculous. Plus there is no 'happening across some power armor', given you as the GM decide that and you've said they'd have to 'earn it' (whatever that means, apparently mages don't have to 'earn' those starting spells) at some nebulous point in the future again the player has no expectation of ever getting to play an actual power armor pilot but instead play a powerless character with few useful skills unlike everyone else that apparently don't have to worry about 'earning' those starting spells and such they get.

"Starting Equipment" for a character being quoted as a "rule" is, in my opinion, silly. No matter where the story begins a character has a specific list of items? The year is 109 PA, you and your fellow player characters have been captured by the Coalition... but uhh.. you still have each specific item listed in the OCC starting equipment list for your character.. and apparantley I can't take that away from you. So you are CS prisoners with power armor, mega damage weapons, mega damage armor, TW gems, and whatever else you are supposed to have. What do you do?

Okay, and just how are you stripping the mages of the spells they know, the psychics of their psychic powers, etc? Because in that scenario you posit what's essential to those classes can't reasonably be stripped from them without destroying the character, so again you've got those with some kind of special power essential to their class getting to keep it while those who're trained and make use of gear like the power armor pilot are left with nothing and apparently you feel that they can't acquire something on the way out when escaping (since obviously they HAVE to escape or its going to be a short campaign as no one's going to enjoy a campaign where they spend all their time rotting in a prison cell).

Or would you rather propose a scenario to me in which I am screwing over the players in the campaign that I am running? I never grow tired of hearing how people take umbrage to a campaign they have neither been consulted on nor consulted the GM or other players on.

I plan my campaigns for months taking careful consideration into what the players WANT out of their next campaign.

Not every campaign has to start with "you are in full gear wandering around in merc town when you see a shadowy guy waving you towards him" or "You are on patrol, in your armor, when you hear Xiticix buzzing in the distance"

Some campaigns start like epic novels and build into various crescendos over multiple acts in a story arc.

Amazing how many of those epic novels start with the protagonist(s) as well-armed and experienced individuals before starting those epic journeys. Many don't start as penniless sorts without anything beyond knowing how to plow a field, many start off good and work their way up even higher.

[Killer Cyborg]

Plus given we're talking Rifts the average power armor like the SAMAS IS low power for the setting

I guess for SOME GMs it is.

[Noon]

There is a huge difference between saying these are the classes that I am allowing and saying yes you can play a RPA but I won't allow you to have the item that actually is the core of playing an RPA.

If you're not allowed to play an RPA AT ALL, that ALSO somehow terribly denies you what is the core of playing an RPA as well! Where's the complaining about that?

Seriously, this seems to be just trying to make oneself a victim by choosing the PA pilot with no PA, when you are not forced to. If the PA pilot with no PA is such a bitter pill - quit taking it! The only person who'd be being a dick to you is yourself!

[Daeglan]

There is a huge difference between saying these are the classes that I am allowing and saying yes you can play a RPA but I won't allow you to have the item that actually is the core of playing an RPA.

If you're not allowed to play an RPA AT ALL, that ALSO somehow terribly denies you what is the core of playing an RPA as well! Where's the complaining about that?

Seriously, this seems to be just trying to make oneself a victim by choosing the PA pilot with no PA, when you are not forced to. If the PA pilot with no PA is such a bitter pill - quit taking it! You are your own problem here, no one else is.

I don't have a problem with restricting classes. I do have a problem with a GM who messes with a class in a way that screws the player. Especially when they deny a player a core ability. And having a power armor is a core ability for a Power Armor Pilot.

[Noon]

Plus given we're talking Rifts the average power armor like the SAMAS IS low power for the setting

I guess for SOME GMs it is.

SAMAS pilot has his SAMAS, vagabond has his bag of candy. Pretty much totally equal, really! If you think about it!

I don't have a problem with restricting classes. I do have a problem with a GM who messes with a class in a way that screws the player.

Just keep deciding to swollow that bitter pill, then claim someone else is screwing you over by making it so very bitter! Why do they make it so bitter? Every time your own volition has you reach out and pick up the pill, then by your own actions put the pill in your mouth, it is just so bitter! How terrible are other people to do that to you, eh? Villains, they are!

[Nightmask]

Plus given we're talking Rifts the average power armor like the SAMAS IS low power for the setting

I guess for SOME GMs it is.

SAMAS pilot has his SAMAS, vagabond has his bag of candy. Pretty much totally equal, really! If you think about it!

No, SAMAS pilot has his SAMAS, Ley Line Walker his spells, Warlock has his spells, Mind Melter has his psionics, etc. A SAMAS pilot without a SAMAS is the same as a Ley Line Walker without spells or a Mind Melter without Psionics, meaning he's not a SAMAS pilot and the Mind Melter isn't a Mind Melter and so on. That should be a no-brainer, because it's not about 'being equal', a really nonsense term. You can replace 'SAMAS pilot' with 'Ley Line Walker' and get the same result because they aren't equal and it has nothing to do with being equal. Because you apparently seem to think the vagabond with that example is somehow what the baseline is, while ignoring the fact that the Ley Line Walker and Mind Melter are totally unequal to and superior to the vagabond AND you can't even take what they have away from them unlike the SAMAS pilot who relies on a device that can be damaged, destroyed, or taken from him.

So unless you're going to insist that Ley Line Walkers and Mind Melters and the like are somehow supposed to start with nothing at all like the vagabond as well it's really just ridiculous to keep comparing the SAMAS pilot to a vagabond and how HE should have absolutely nothing like the vagabond when he isn't a vagabond but these others with inherent abilities far above the vagabond somehow are exempt from that requirement.

[Killer Cyborg]

I don't have a problem with restricting classes. I do have a problem with a GM who messes with a class in a way that screws the player.

Just keep deciding to swollow that bitter pill, then claim someone else is screwing you over by making it so very bitter! Why do they make it so bitter? Every time your own volition has you reach out and pick up the pill, then by your own actions put the pill in your mouth, it is just so bitter! How terrible are other people to do that to you, eh? Villains, they are!

Yeah... I'm kinda with Noon here.

How is "You can take this class, but you can't have (class feature X)" worse than "You can't take this class at all."...?

[Daeglan]

The Power armor is what makes a power armor pilot special. Take away what makes them special and they are no longer special. And it is one thing to start with a player as a prisoner as long as you give them access to their power armor on the way out of prison. It is something else entirely to say you will eventually get your power armor. That is a dick move. the other is a start to an adventure.