GENERAL
Ah, this old nugget! This is a topic that typically divides the community into three groups:
Magic is too limiting and has no comparative value to technology;
Magic is powerful and can be leveraged to create unique and captivating arguments to beat technology; and,
3. Those that have no real skin in the game.
I’ll admittedly place myself in the third group, accepting there are compelling reasons to believe those in both groups 1 and 2. In other words, I consider myself non-biased. I’ve played both magic- and tech-based characters and can see the elements that would draw a player either side of the coin. Full disclosure, I am partial to the Wilderness Scout with cybernetics to augment (one of the ultimate skill-jockey classes in Rifts), Headhunter, or CS Military Specialist.
Note: I realize this might cause some of you to give pause to my statement about being unbiased.
DISCUSSION
On The Face of It. Examining raw characteristics, game mechanics and the statistics, technology appears to win, consistently. Magic has the capacity to be so much more than presented at face value, but this is largely its biggest drawback. Like any artistic or creative endeavour, magic’s beauty is in the eye of the beholder, success limited only by a Player’s instincts, ingenuity, and creativity. This is tempered by the rule mechanics for spells, possibly further by a GM’s unwillingness or inability to accept Player suggestions. We've all likely heard of magic spells being abused in a d20 system based on a rather loose interpretation of the mechanics (e.g. Peasant Railgun).
I liken technology as a quantifiable question of engineering and math: very well defined (MD output, range, E-clip capacity) and easy to comprehend. Magic, on the other hand, is more like a qualitative answer to a question, or an artistic expression of one’s creativity, shoe-horned into the game mechanics.
Tactical Level. With equivalency in engagement (e.g., group of CS warriors versus a same size group of mages), the CS would seem to have several immense advantages:
o Efficacy. Technological weapons have longer weapon ranges and greater sheer firepower compared to spells of similar effect. On the flip side, once those mages close the distance, things get interesting.
o Endurance. Robots and power armour forces (extends to body armour) generally have greater durability and manoeuvrability. This doesn’t discount what mages and creatures of magic can bring, as seen with Siege of Tolkeen.
o Integrated Arms. Technological forces also draw on a weapons like long-range missiles and ‘artillery’ support, cybernetics, and other human ingenuity. Can mages bring a variety of arms? Sure, but it appears more like a patchwork solution in comparison.
o Horror Factor. Not something terribly well-defined, the idea is that combat zones incur possible penalties on anyone. Most are tied to technological threats. I would assume it easy enough for a GM to apply the same to magical effects. The easiest example is an ambush by magical forces. The bizarre and esoteric effects should cause panic and confusion.
Strategic Level. Using the Siege on Tolkeen as a venue for discussion, several things seem to be stacked against the defenders:
o Numbers. As presented, the CS has immense numbers of troops (granted, mostly conscript soldiers), and they are drawing from a vast expanse of resources. The relatively secluded Tolkeen does have access to dimensional rifts and portals, and certainly has recruited a fair number of D-Bees/monster allies. Ultimately, the CS has clearly defined lines of communications and support, something the Siege of Tolkeen series did not really define for defenders. Could a significant inject of Naruni Enterprise technology and pilots have made a difference? Sure, but we recall that Tolkeen was boorish on technology, preferring magical solutions.
o Internal Political Motivation. Both sides have high internal support for the cause. The CS is clearly out to eradicate what they view as a clear and present danger to humanity's survival (magic and the D-Bees/monsters they allow to roam amongst them). Tolkeen, presented as the more lenient and open society, is clearly the underdog and looking to make a stand to defend their homeland. Not until the end do they start to fracture.
o Political Support. The CS has more allies or neutral entities in its corner, many of which are “small fries” in comparison. A few do so because they do not wish to cross the Emperor or the CS war machine. Tolkeen has assembled several strategic allies, but as presented, it seems more difficult to assemble enough of a force with the moral fortitude to see the battle through to the end.
o Economic Elements. The CS has been on a war-footing for years now, particularly in the recent era with the split of Free Quebec. They are also the economic juggernaut of North America, which lends some credence to their superiority in this respect. Tolkeen has long-since been the target of CS aggressions, and surely have made significant efforts to shore-up their defences. Based strictly on anecdotal and implied evidence from the books, the CS has a clear edge.
Terrain. The CS has boots on the ground across the Tolkeen Eastern and Southern flank and could encroach on the West with relative ease. To the North, we have the Xiticix. Tolkeen certainly has more esoteric means of movement, meaning old-school methods of measuring success by land claims shouldn't necessarily be a key performance indicator. That said, with the exception of the Sorceror's Revenge and use of water elementals along the Mississippi River, it appears the strategic initiative rested almost exclusively with the CS. To an extent this also extends to the aerial dimension, as strategic bombers fly high enough to evade ground-based visual detection and still not be threatened by orbital killer satellites.
Investment. The investment in a Player Character’s ability to “level up” and become more effective in influencing the game is a factor.
Time. I rate technology is the big winner here. Purchase a Mega-Damage weapon and spent the time to get ther Weapon Proficiency and you are now capable of killing armed and armoured targets; slap in another e-clip, repeat. Mass-produced and recharged by nuclear generators on the cheap, there is little real investment. A first level merc with a Wilk's rifle doesn't do any more damage than one at tenth level. Magic flips things around. Taking years to develop latent talents into mystical capabilities, they start with a series of spells and P.P.E. baseline. Experience leveraging those spells takes time to finesse. High level mages gain access to great stores of esoteric knowledge that baffles technology, making them clearly formidable opponents. But at the cost of significant time.Note: Nothing stops a mage from using a rifle in addition to spells either – well, excepting ego.
Money. Magic obviously has an edge there. All you must do is cast a spell to cause Mega-Damage or become capable of withstanding that damage. A human non-mage character is limited to SDC attacks and damage, requiring the purchase of MDC armour and MD weapon to make a difference; this takes money. This issue is pretty much hand-waved away in Character Creation, likely for this very reason. Gaming an SDC character with no resources is pretty much a turkey shoot for the technologically inclined, much less so for psychic classes or practitioners of magic. Mages created effect out of thin air; all it costs is a bit of sweat off the brow and, presto! Magic armor, or a magic blast into the enemy.
Adaptibility. The potential for dealing with scenarios to a positive conclusion is very much a forte of the practitioner of magic. Technological solutions are very capable of solving problems, but typically limited by form and function. Magic can be used by a creative mage to do several things. This adaptability comes with time and experience, which leads us back to the Time discussion. Comes out as a zero-sum game.
Volume of Entries (in the World Books/Sourcebooks)
Technology. Hands-down the favoured by virtue of the sheer volume of entries. It has also shown an upward trending development (power creep if you will) over the years. By extension, there is a limiting factor in the variety of the systems: lasers, plasma, particle beams and missiles. The sheer firepower is limited in how much kinetic energy they can pack into a single salvo. Yet, as the saying goes, variety is the spice of life. In this case, there isn’t much to play with – we’re just building a better toaster.
Magic. One of the greatest limiting factors are the spells available to magic users, particularly those with “limited to” or specific types of magic. Others require specific spell components as well. Realistically there should be countless spells, but this isn’t really feasible. Anything technological equipment can do, magic should have an equivalent. To counter this relative lack of variety, a GM can either allow additional spells to be created (essentially house rules), or Players must become adept and creative in application. For the purposes of these discussions, I would state the latter is the appropriate solution space, not the former. This becomes an inflection point between Player and GM to determine just how far to stretch the spell’s capabilities.
It’s All in the Tactics. Given two equally equipped and similarly trained forces, tactics tips things in favour of one over the other. Given unequal forces, it is incumbent on the lesser of the two to change the playing field to their advantage.
In a Straight Up Fight (Regular Warfare). In a straight up skirmish (e.g. CS fighting patrol meet up with an equivalent force from Tolkeen), given modern military combat tactics and the range/damage edge of CS technology, technology likely wins. Unless Tolkeen forces find a way to ambush the CS forces or another method to clearly gain initiative/reduce the range of the firefight, I'd forecast fewer than 25% losses by the CS (mostly mechanized transports, heavier robots or power armour). This considers peer-on-peer engagements involving similarly equipped and trained, uniformed, state-sponsored forces (e.g. NATO vs Warsaw Pact, or the CS vs FQ). What’s keeping a caster from using energy rifles too? What about Warlocks/Shifters summoning support? What about use of the terrain? All fair questions that lead us to Irregular Warfare.
Magic to Even the Conventional Playing Field. One of the things I found astounding in the Siege of Tolkeen was the development of the Juggernauts. Brilliantly illustrated, the very idea behind it was questionable. Essentially, they leveraged magic to fuse a person and requisite Elementals into a giant robot to try and level the conventional playing field. This is Tolkeen trying to fight a war, facing the Coalition's strengths head-on. Bad news bears from the start. Juggernauts are monumentally pricey in more terms than credits. I discuss this point more in-depth in The Bazaar #49: Fixing the Siege on Tolkeen Series.
Note: From a gaming mechanics perspective, I felt that PB missed a critical piece that could have made Juggernauts more impactful. When a Juggernaut blows up, have the Elementals rage against enemies in the vicinity (1D4 melee rounds), inflicting damage before they dissipated. This makes it a double-edged sword for the CS. I speak to the design issues I have with the Juggernauts in the Scholar’s Review articles below:
The Summoning Game. What about Shifters and Warlocks summoning help? When did magic become a hindrance instead of a force multiplier? I readily agree. Magic gets a bit of a “pass” and concurrently a “bye” as well. Apparently, there are Warlocks and Elementals galore at Tolkeen! Summoning issues are discounted, problems then hand-waved away, leaving Tolkeen with a significant standing force of beings that don’t like to stick around (Elementals, I mean). Success rate for a 6th level Warlock summoning an Elemental is 30%, jumping to 50% at a Ley Line Nexus; not great odds. Shifters cast Dimensional Portal for a measly 1000 P.P.E., or other Summon spells for other huge investments. Magic can and should be examined as a force multiplier of exponential means, but let’s make sure the game mechanics at least support some level of that possibility. I’m not convinced they currently do.
Sneaky Little Buggers. The vast majority of Midwest North America is heavily forested and overgrown. Our modern concept of engaging an enemy from miles/kilometers away would NOT be the norm. ‘Fighting the enemy on your own terms’ is a maxim anyone with military experience would intuitively understand. Tolkeen would be crazy to fight Regular Warfare against the CS; the concept of Irregular Warfare now comes into play. They needed to change the game to remove their disadvantages. Fighting in forested regions relatively close to Ley Lines, for a start, really negates those disqualifiers. Irregular Warfare is a bit of a bugbear for many, something I’ll be addressing this in a follow-on post. Ironically, it isn't until after the fall of Tolkeen that we see any commitment of Tolkeen "retribution squads" taking the fight to the Coalition States backyard, namely in the 'Burbs and against CS logistics. This is further detailed in Rifts Adventure Sourcebook 2: Chi-town 'Burbs (FireTown & the Tolkeen Crisis).
Magic in Combat. So, what’s a magic character to do in a full-fledged battle? Let’s start by not going toe-to-toe with a CS Abolisher or a platoon of CS soldiers. The rules for magic showed significant improvements over the original Rifts Main Book with a simple rules tweak (e.g. Level 1 to 5 spells cast as a single melee action). A mage can now actually commit to directly assisting in combat. They are still fallible and subject to interruption, but this simple change gave one hell of a boost. Given the mixed nature of most Tolkeen forces and the immediacy of eliminating more prominent threats, one could easily imagine the “closer crocodile to the canoe” would get the most attention right away. This would free up the caster to support through magic, and/or move closer to then apply their mystical capabilities.
Why Play a Magic Character Then? There is a great write-up summarizing this topic in World Book 16: Federation of Magic. My first sense for why is simple: It is just damned cool! Some of these O.C.C.s have real character behind them, some raw power too. But the magic user isn’t a straight-up combat beast, they are a supporting character that can carry the day, under the right circumstances. By employing their abilities with non-magic mercenaries or D-Bees and other magical monsters (e.g. dragons, Daemonix), you really start forming a party with some clear flexibility and synergies. As most Player groups number 4-6, my impression is that most are playing a discrete, elite mercenary group for hire. Most encounters are likely close-in, where small-party tactical engagements take place. This allows mages to both actively support their own forces, while also applying arcane skills to defeating the opposing forces.
Cost in PPE versus E-Clips. One of the virtues of playing a magic character is that you are never really completely unarmed. Most mages have at least some spells directly attributable to their gaming experiences. Even without an E-rifle, they can sling some sorts of offensive spells (Carpet of Adhesion anyone?). That said, unless playing a magic RCC, or rolling hot for your baseline P.P.E., many of these direct attack spells cost dearly in terms of a character’s max P.P.E. capacity. Any CS Grunt with five clips can throw out a torrent of firepower over several melee rounds. A mage, not so much, so this is a consideration. Extend that firefight long enough, those initial E-clips and perhaps some secondary sidearms are pretty much all most soldiers and professional men-at-arms would normally expect to carry. A practitioner of magic, equally equipped with an E-rifle and E-clips, still has P.P.E. to draw upon thereafter. How does that mage stack up against a CS soldier wielding a vibro-knife now?
Technology Is Still a Thing. So, one of the questions I keep asking myself, is why does one assume a magic character would not have an energy rifle or energy pistol? A good number of O.C.C.s have these Weapon Proficiencies as baseline O.C.C. Skills, the remainder access as Other/Secondary skills; notable exception for those Magic O.C.C.s in World Book 15: Spirit West (for relatively obvious reasons). A wandering group of warriors that included spell-slingers could still engage in a firefight at range, selecting instead to support their group with defensive/utility spells and other means to win the fire fight.
CONCLUSION
The crux of the issue is that magic is truly a creative art, and one that finds itself getting shoe-horned into the rules set. Just like fine art, some appreciate it and see its value or application, while others just see an ugly creation taking up wall space. There are legitimate umbrages to be had with things like the ranges for many offensive spells. Urban sprawl/ruins (lots of those around), and heavily wooded areas (lots of that too) provide two examples where a merc’s laser rifle with a 2000 ft range has little comparative value over a magic user hiding behind a tree or building only a couple of hundred feet away.
For the GM, it is more about presenting scenarios that do not always force the party into kinetic engagements at maximum range. Let Players find creative solutions that close the distance and allow the facets of their class shine through. For Players, accept that, with some exceptions; magic classes are not going to engage an enemy in the same way a Glitter Boy or a merc armed to the teeth would. Get creative with your casting and spell selection. Find ways to engage the enemy at their weak point instead of trying to hit them where they are the strongest.
Is the comparison of technology to magic a fair one? No, but I don’t expect it to be. Quite frankly this is an element I appreciate with the Rifts RPG. The idea of comparative Challenge Ratings or equalizing all the O.C.C.s to the same starting level is not something I agree with. Most systems that purport to accomplish this are quickly proven wrong, leading to patchwork changes and errata. For a system with over 30 years of longevity, with only a modification of the game system (RUE) and very few actual errata (a key one adjusting casting times), this demonstrates a strength of the system. For a GM with Practitioners of Magic in their Player Group, be cognizant of the differences and make the game enjoyable for all your Players. Consider limitations, but also be prepared to allow some creative license for the Player as they explore some unusual and inventive ways to express their Character’s mystical abilities.
Return to All Posts
Please LIKE and SUBSCRIBE!
