A Rifts Balance Discussion for Roguewriter & Buzzard

[Calico_Jack73]

A week or so ago I mentioned that Jerry Bruckheimer was brought on-board for producing a RIFTS movie. If you aren't familiar with RIFTS it is a post-apocalyptic RPG where ANYTHING is possible. Roguewriter and Buzzard had quite a little discussion going regarding the balance of the game. On one side Roguewriter supported the idea that it is up to a DM to balance any game properly regardless of system. On the other was Buzzard who insisted that a game publisher figure character balance into the written rules. They had some great points between the two of them that actually applied to any system... not just the Palladium system. Unfortunately it wasn't really the topic for the discussion thread which was solely about the movie. Hopefully we can get them to continue the discussion and have some new and thoughtful input as well.

Original RIFTS movie thread

I really hope the mods keep this in General Discussion considering that it fits the description of this forum.

General RPG Discussion
Discuss D&D and RPGs in general, DM/player issues, settings, etc. Please look to see if there is a more specific forum first. D20 games other than D&D are discussed in the d20 System Games forum below.

 

[Calico_Jack73]

Looks like it is up to me to get the ball rolling...

I just read an article comparing Rifts to d20 Modern at RPGnet.
Comparison Article

It brought up some of the good points and bad points of Rifts. Regarding game system balance I am forced to agree with Roguewriter's point of view that it is up to the DM to enforce balance more than being the responsibility of the game designers. Some people point out that some of the OCCs and RCCs in Rifts are horribly overbalanced (Yes, I know the Cosmo Knight is the baddest mama-jamma out there). Think about this though... in D&D the system allows for you to play pretty much any creature out of the Monster Manual. Read the MM3.5 and look up the Troll. You get stat modifiers and preferred class for pretty much every creature. Let's say that I'm about to join a game and I want to play a Troll Barbarian. The rules certainly support it and even though I'd have a hell of a ECL I'd still have the Troll character I want. It is up to the DM to decide if such a character is appropriate in his campaign. If the DM tells me that he WON'T allow such a character then he is utilizing the same kind of balance that the GM of a Rifts campaign has to use if a player said they wanted to play something that was waaaay too powerful for what he has in mind. Even within the system, certain classes aren't appropriate to the setting even if there is no ECL. If my DM was running a Forgotten Realms campaign set in Maztica then my playing a Samurai probably wouldn't fit. Not that they are any more powerful, it just isn't appropriate to the setting. Ultimately, I have to agree that I believe balance is always in the hands of the DM.

 

[Green Knight]

I got sick of Rifts a long time ago. I tried playing it in a campaign, recently, but I just couldn't stand it, anymore. It's not just the unbalanced nature of the game, but the rules, themselves. I despise Palladiums rules.

As for being unbalanced, yeah, it is without a doubt. Anything that AUTOMATICALLY requires that the DM must shoulder the burden, rather then having a system built into the game itself, is unbalanced.

Take D&D. Is an 8th-level Vampire Fighter balanced to an 8th-level Human Fighter? Of course not. But built within the system is the Level Adjustment rule, which means that while those two characters aren't balanced, the Vampire IS balanced against a 16-level Human Fighter (Vampire's Level Adjustment is +8, I believe). So the DM doesn't have to make a guess as to whether such a character would be balanced with the other 16th-level characters in the party. It says so in black and white right in the books.

Rifts has no such balancing mechanism. The closest they have to that is the various XP tables, which frankly, are a joke. For one, you gain so LITTLE XP if you're playing off the base rules that it takes FOREVER to level, anyway. So it's not as if someone who's playing a low XP class is going to level so much more rapidly then a high XP table class like the Dragon Hatchling. And even if they did, the XP requirements aren't that drastically apart. So in actual practice, most characters are never more then 1 level apart.

Secondly, even IF a class like the Cyber-Knight were to level much more rapidly then the Glitter Boy, it still wouldn't mean squat. A 1st-level Glitter Boy can wipe the floor with a 15th-level Cyber-Knight without breaking a sweat. So the Cyber-Knight being ahead two or three levels makes no difference whatsoever.

IMO, Palladium should just eliminate their Godforsaken system entirely. I personally advocate going the D20 route, but only because I don't think Siembieda and co. are capable of producing a rules-set that's in any way balanced.

That's just the tip of the iceberg, as far as Rifts problems are concerned, but I'm trying to stay on-topic here, so I'll just go ahead and stop with these complaints.

 

[Green Knight]

Looks like it is up to me to get the ball rolling...

I just read an article comparing Rifts to d20 Modern at RPGnet.
Comparison Article

It brought up some of the good points and bad points of Rifts. Regarding game system balance I am forced to agree with Roguewriter's point of view that it is up to the DM to enforce balance more than being the responsibility of the game designers. Some people point out that some of the OCCs and RCCs in Rifts are horribly overbalanced (Yes, I know the Cosmo Knight is the baddest mama-jamma out there). Think about this though... in D&D the system allows for you to play pretty much any creature out of the Monster Manual. Read the MM3.5 and look up the Troll. You get stat modifiers and preferred class for pretty much every creature. Let's say that I'm about to join a game and I want to play a Troll Barbarian. The rules certainly support it and even though I'd have a hell of a ECL I'd still have the Troll character I want. It is up to the DM to decide if such a character is appropriate in his campaign. If the DM tells me that he WON'T allow such a character then he is utilizing the same kind of balance that the GM of a Rifts campaign has to use if a player said they wanted to play something that was waaaay too powerful for what he has in mind. Even within the system, certain classes aren't appropriate to the setting even if there is no ECL. If my DM was running a Forgotten Realms campaign set in Maztica then my playing a Samurai probably wouldn't fit. Not that they are any more powerful, it just isn't appropriate to the setting. Ultimately, I have to agree that I believe balance is always in the hands of the DM.

But Palladium puts the weight COMPLETELY on the shoulders of the DM. For example, let's take your Troll character. The Monster Manual states that the Level Adjustment for the Troll is +5. Now let's assume the party is composed of 8th-level PC's from standard races (Human, Elf, Dwarf, etc). So the DM knows that a 3rd-level Troll Barbarian would be balanced with the rest of the PC's. The only work the DM needs to put into it is in deciding if he'll let a Troll PC into the game or not. That's it.

No such guide with Rifts, though. ALL the work is on the DM's hands. So how much better IS a Cosmo-Knight then a Glitter Boy? If you're going to allow a Glitter Boy, then what do you need to do to balance the other players Juicer to match? Nevermind that it IS possible in D&D to balance more powerful creatures against weaker creatures. That Troll, being 5 levels higher, is balanced. However, without altering the classes, there is NO way of balancing a Juicer with a Cosmo-Knight.

Rifts is a fantastic setting, without a doubt, but its rules-set is just utter garbage. If they were to replace it completely with something good, then IMO, they'd have a solid gold product on their hands.

 

[Calico_Jack73]

Secondly, even IF a class like the Cyber-Knight were to level much more rapidly then the Glitter Boy, it still wouldn't mean squat. A 1st-level Glitter Boy can wipe the floor with a 15th-level Cyber-Knight without breaking a sweat. So the Cyber-Knight being ahead two or three levels makes no difference whatsoever.

Of course that is assuming that a Cyberknight would face the Glitterboy in a straight up fight at range. That is like saying that an unarmored wizard in D&D would take on a Fighter in a straight up melee duel.
Every character, regardless of system, has to be played to it's strengths. The GB pilot has to get out of the armor sometime... as a GM I enforced it regularly. I've spent 12+ hours in MOPP gear (Military Chem Gear) and it isn't a pleasant experience. I've even used the new suit which is considerably cooler but it still isn't fun. People who think their character would want to wear the GB armor (or any PA for that matter) for days are dreaming. One of the strengths of the Rifts system is that each piece of equipment has different damage locations. Take out that Boom Gun and the GB is toast. It's not like the GB pilot can go to Best Buy and pick up a new one.
Sure it takes a while to level up in the Palladium system but think about it... do levels really matter that much? They don't govern maximum spell level and in a setting where the least laser pistol can kill your character instantly the extra SDC for gaining a level doesn't matter either. Extra attacks and better skill bonuses are the only real advantage but even then at 1st level RIFTS character are pretty proficient at any skill they take. The difference is that RIFTS characters come into the game as experienced veterans, not adventurers fresh out of apprenticeship. I never really cared about leveling up when I played RIFTS which I thought was a refreshing change from D&D.

As a disclaimer... I don't currently play RIFTS but do have fond memories of the game.

 

[Calico_Jack73]

Rifts is a fantastic setting, without a doubt, but its rules-set is just utter garbage. If they were to replace it completely with something good, then IMO, they'd have a solid gold product on their hands.

Did you read the article at RPGnet? I thought it was funny how they thought DR was superior to MDC. Like you could ever destroy an M1A1 Abrams MBT with a Glock 9mm pistol.

Both systems have strengths and weaknesses. Of course the Palladium system is ANCIENT and is due for a massive overhaul.

 

[Kanegrundar]

Put me in the camp of a Palladium foe. While I love the Rifts setting, there is something wrong with a game that put all the burden of balance on the shoulders of the GM. The last Rifts game I ran I only allowed about 15 OCC and RCC's. Everything else was waaaaay overpowered. There is nothing fun about a game in which each new supplement that raises the power level so much that it pretty much invalidates the books before it. This isn't fair to the players or the GM. I hate telling players that while we're going to play in South America, they can't play the kind of character they want. I hate even more having to go through each book and picking apart every new race and class to decide if I can actually use them without having them overshadow any of the other PC's. KS desperately needs to re-work the system to give it a sense of balance, but I doubt that he ever will. That's the greatest tragedy out of all this: such a great setting that is lying in ruin due to a horrible system...

Kane

 

[Calico_Jack73]

The last Rifts game I ran I only allowed about 15 OCC and RCC's.

Kane

There are only 11 Character Classes and 6 Races in the PHB (if I did my math right). Seems like you were ahead of D&D for character choices.

I do agree that the system needs an overhaul. I don't know if d20 is the proper system for it but honestly it wouldn't be that hard to cross it over though you'd still have the balance issues. Imposing limits on what PA or Robot a player can have or what race they can play undermines what RIFTS was trying to accomplish in the first place.

 

[Green Knight]

Of course that is assuming that a Cyberknight would face the Glitterboy in a straight up fight at range. That is like saying that an unarmored wizard in D&D would take on a Fighter in a straight up melee duel.

Every character, regardless of system, has to be played to it's strengths. The GB pilot has to get out of the armor sometime... as a GM I enforced it regularly.

Now see, this is a problem, right here. You say a Cyber-Knight in a straight-up fight would be like a Wizard in a melee fight with a Fighter, and THEN you make this example? Isn't this a little bit like a Wizard attacking a Fighter with his full compliment of spells while the Fighter's on the can taking a dump?

That's the essence of balance, right there. All things being equal, it should be a fair fight. One SHOULDN'T have to rely on the other guy being completely unarmed to win in a fight.

One of the strengths of the Rifts system is that each piece of equipment has different damage locations. Take out that Boom Gun and the GB is toast. It's not like the GB pilot can go to Best Buy and pick up a new one.

I liked that bit, but in practice, it's not so great. For one, it's a pain in the butt to hit smaller parts like the Boom Gun. Secondly, who's gonna survive long enough to be able to eliminate the damned Boom Gun? It has, what 170 MDC? The average Rifts rifle does 4d6 MD. The best body armor has 100 MDC. Meanwhile the Boom Gun does 3d6X10 MD damage.

So let me paint a picture: Cyber-Knight vs. Glitter Boy fight. Cyber-Knight goes first. He makes his called shot to the Boom Gun and does his maximum damage of 24, leaving the Boom Gun with 146 MDC. Glitter Boy fires and does its MINIMUM of 30 MD. Cyber-Knights' armor is down to 70 MDC.

Attack 2: Cyber-Knight fires, rolling max, again. The Boom Gun is down to 122 MDC. Glitter Boy fires, doing minimum damage, again, and reduces the Cyber-Knights armor to 40 MDC.

Attack 3: Boom Gun reduced to 96 MDC, Cyber-Knight to 10 MDC.

Attack 4: Boom Gun reducted to 72, Cyber-Knights body armor is blown off and his Cyber-Armor is reduced to 30 MDC.

Attack 5: Boom Gun reduced to 48, Cyber-Knight is blown off the face of existence.

And this is with the Cyber-Knight doing MAXIMUM damage and the Glitter Boy doing MINIMUM damage. And if it's a T-550 Glitter Boy, with a compliment of mini-missiles, a laser, and a vibro-sword, along with the Boom Gun, then your chances of disarming him as a way of winning just went right out the window.

Sure it takes a while to level up in the Palladium system but think about it... do levels really matter that much?

No they don't, and that's a problem.

They don't govern maximum spell level and in a setting where the least laser pistol can kill your character instantly the extra SDC for gaining a level doesn't matter either. Extra attacks and better skill bonuses are the only real advantage but even then at 1st level RIFTS character are pretty proficient at any skill they take. The difference is that RIFTS characters come into the game as experienced veterans, not adventurers fresh out of apprenticeship. I never really cared about leveling up when I played RIFTS which I thought was a refreshing change from D&D.

And that's a problem, right there. For instance, say you're just using the OCC's in the main book. Cyber-Knight, Juicer, etc. Levelling up doesn't mean much, therefore your 1st-level Cyber-Knight and Juicer won't be all that much better then your 8th-level Cyber-Knight of Juicer. What does this mean? That throughout your characters career, you'll have to fight villains of roughly the SAME power level. The bad guys never get more interesting.

For instance, in D&D, you start out fighting Goblins, Orcs, Hobgoblins, move on to Drow, Wights, Ghosts, then Vampire, Demons, Devils, and so on. As you progress your power progresses, and as that happens the enemies you fight are consistently better.

Not so with Rifts. you never change all that much, so you're limited in who you can fight. Of course, you can always have the party start off being packed full of Cosmo-Knights, Dragon Hatchlings, Glitter Boys, and so on, but you're missing out on the fun of getting your ass kicked by a goblin.

Personally, I favor the second option when playing Rifts, because as much fun as it it to be afraid of getting killed by a Goblin, I hate being stuck in a rut for the rest of the campaign.

As a disclaimer... I don't currently play RIFTS but do have fond memories of the game.

So do I, but it's something I'll never enjoy for any kind of a long-lasting campaign.

 

[trilobite]

BESM d20 might be a good fit for a Rifts d20 conversion.