So Dr. Destroyer walks into the UN...

[Polaris]

Upon getting a "sponsor" to allow him to speak, the Destroyer approached the podium and looked out at the stunned diplomats of the world. Representatives of the various nations of earth listened as the Destroyer announced a "new world order". Gone were the days of American hegemony and domination. No longer would the poorest nations be forced to sell their labor and their souls to serve the masters of the "economic north". To everyone's surprise (given the leader of the new world order), only those nations that wished to join would be included within this new world order.

Several nations, seeking an end to their economic plight, and hoping for some protection from the intimidation of the world's only remaining superpower, joined immediately. Over the following several days, others followed suit.

The Destroyer had succesfully seized an opportunity. The new found willingness of the US government to flex its awesome military power had sent many nations scurrying for protection. Destroyer would allow many of the leaders to live a life of extreme wealth, luxuries, power and security... in exchange, they had to serve HIM (see the deal Rakshasa realized at the bottom of page 15 in CKC).

With rule over a growing number of nations, the Destroyer began to shift the economic policies of many of the Lesser Developed nations toward the policies recommended by the Oraganization of African Unity (they had a study not long ago that demonstrated that they could expedite their economic development dramatically if they focussed upon their strengths and increased traded more within their own nations and with one another, rather than focussing on the economic interests of the economic north).

The nations that joined the new world order were protected by Destroyer and his nearly 20,000 special troops. In addition, Destroyer was able to place weapon platforms near the borders of some of the nations, and threatened the use of weapons technologically far superior to the nuclear weapons posessed by his adversaries.

While the nations joining Destroyer were far from an immediate threat to the power of the north, it was becomming clear that given enough time, it could grow from "a thorn in the flesh, to become a dagger in the heart". The established powers began to worry.

With each nation falling sway to Destroyer's promises, and the growing improvements in the lives of many of the people in the new world order (by improvements, I certainly do not mean they were living at America's standards, but far better than they had under their old masters), the established powers became more and more nervous. Someone had to do something!

The Champions, back at their base, were meeting with a representative of the US government when they were contacted by... EUROSTAR! Eurostar contacted the Champions seeking an alliance to stop the Destroyer. They had already recruited another of Destroyer's nemesis: VIPER.

Do the heroes join an alliance with Eurostar and Viper to stop their mutual enemy ("enemy of my enemy is my friend"), or do they gamble that they will find a solution more palatable to their taste?

Polaris

[Agent Escafarc]

Have you been reading Waid & Kitson's EMPIRE from DC :D
I want to be the Sheet Shark;)

[assault]

Originally posted by Polaris
Do the heroes join an alliance with Eurostar and Viper to stop their mutual enemy ("enemy of my enemy is my friend"), or do they gamble that they will find a solution more palatable to their taste?

Interesting.

For most of my characters: find another solution. Eurostar and VIPER are _not_ lesser evils.

Alan

[OddHat]

Well done. :)

[Polaris]

No I haven't... I just thought it would be an interesting story idea, and was wanting some thoughts from the Hero community on what they thought...:)

Really, the inspiration came from my EC 551 (Economic Development in the Third World) class combined with WWII (where the Americans worked with the Bolsheviks to confront the Nazi threat), our group's propensity to hate all villains regardless of the cirumstance (would THIS be enough?), finally getting the new version of Dr. Destroyer, and probably some other places...:)

Polaris

[OddHat]

Originally posted by Polaris
No I haven't... I just thought it would be an interesting story idea, and was wanting some thoughts from the Hero community on what they thought...:)

Really, the inspiration came from my EC 551 (Economic Development in the Third World) class combined with WWII (where the Americans worked with the Bolsheviks to confront the Nazi threat), our group's propensity to hate all villains regardless of the cirumstance (would THIS be enough?), finally getting the new version of Dr. Destroyer, and probably some other places...:)

Polaris

In a four color with a touch of grey campaign, it's a good storyline.

In a more realistic world, most dictators are evil to the point where a four color Dr.Destroyer would be an improvement.

[assault]

Originally posted by Polaris
Really, the inspiration came from my EC 551 (Economic Development in the Third World) class combined with WWII (where the Americans worked with the Bolsheviks to confront the Nazi threat), our group's propensity to hate all villains regardless of the cirumstance (would THIS be enough?), finally getting the new version of Dr. Destroyer, and probably some other places...:)


Your influences were fairly visible. :)

I didn't bother explaining all the logic behind my response. I could certainly see my characters being in the minority.

OK, briefly:
(a) Destroyer's political regime wasn't described as being significantly worse than the alternatives.

(b) The economic growth described seems to have been unachievable by the alternative systems.

(c) While cooperating with "villains" is par for the course for my characters, this is highly selective and does not generally extend to groups like Eurostar and VIPER.

Of course, if this occurred in a consistent, ongoing universe, the result would almost certainly be war - "cold" to begin with, and "hot" later on. The latter situation, especially, would encourage the emergence of Golden and Silver Age hyper-patriotisms.

This would undoubtedly push my characters off into supervillain-land, because they wouldn't go along with it. Any other heroes with "a plague on both your houses" attitudes would fact similar choices: conform or go rogue.

Fun. :)

Alan

[Patriot]

Umm..Thats Wonderful!
Yes sir I like it!

[Dauntless]

The trouble here is that if Dr. Destroyer legitimizes himself by becoming a leader of a country or group of countries, he risks the exact same fate of Hussein. I for one always assumed Dr. Destroyer couldn't be taken down because A) his bases were hidden and DD only revealed himself when he wanted to, and B) Huge organizations like the US government had other more serious matters to worry about (like other rogue nations supposedly threatening its security).

If DD does this, he takes away both A) and B). Now the U.S. government (and the non-agreeing countries) can focus all their effort on removing this growing thorn in the side. Would DD risk using WMD against those who would deny him? I don't think so...DD isn't a world destroyer, he's a world conqueror. It doesn't do good to blow up the place you want to control. Now would he blackmail with the use of WMD's? Yes, if he thinks it will make his foes capitulate to his demands. But then you start playing WMD brinkmanship...and once you go over the edge, it's too late. DD may be incredibly intelligent, but his arrogance does not make him wise...something that Brinkmanship players need. And really, no matter how powerful DD is, if they ever figure out where he is, a 10kiloton tac nuke is really going to ruin his day. Heroes may balk at using such force with force, but I don't think it would hamper a country who was in turn threatened by WMD's.

It's an interesting concept, but I don't think it fits DD's style. Ditto with Mechanon. Now, Foxbat might be crazy enough to do something like this, but he's also not powerful enough to pull it off. I think a more slinky player like Menton would be more apt to do something like this.

[Lord Liaden]

Dr. Destroyer not use WMDs? What was the Battle of Detroit about, but an attempt to stop Destroyer from bombarding the United States with meteors to throw it back to the Stone Age? Dr. D is one of the villains who is most likely to use such weapons, especially when his back is against the wall. Case in point, the death ray that levelled Detroit.

Assuming that the people of the countries who accepted Destroyer's rule did so freely, and their lot really did improve, I find it hard to believe that the established powers could justify intervention to the world community, especially if the Doctor did not offer any overt threat. Besides, the difference in approach that the United States has taken toward repressive regimes who have WMDs (China, Korea for ex) would suggest that they would tread carefully around someone with the most advanced technology in the world.

OTOH, I'm not sure that Destroyer would have the patience and tolerance to actually implement these reforms over the squabbling of special interest groups, ethnic enclaves, religious factions and the other divisive influences that keep contributing to derailing policy changes in the Third World. Besides, it's a truism that revolutions don't occur when people are wretched, but when their circumstances start to improve and they begin to hope and question. I could see Destroyer becoming increasingly Draconian in his policies toward his subjects as his frustration with their "pettiness" mounts, and that could be all the excuse and incentive the rest of the world would need to intervene.

[Polaris]

Dauntless: I believe that Destroyer's ability to deter an attack by the United States would be sufficient to ensure he would not suffer the same fate as Saddam Hussein. I would suggest that the US (and other nations) is ultimately more concerned with self-preservation, than with saving a few nations from oppression from Destroyer.

The difficulty is when Destroyer's new world order continues to grow. The US is dependent upon LDCs for much of our economic prosperity. Just by way of example, the US gets 70% of our industrial diamonds from Congo. Congo does not possess the ability to demand a higher price from the US and others because of fear of military retribution (we have invaded before when they had such 'communist' ideas). What would happen if we no longer had the ability to make such threats?

I do not believe Destroyer would need to use such WMD... the mere threat is a weapon itself (and one that has proven quite effective in deterring war in the past).

LL: I am unsure of how patient Destroyer would be either. Revolution against Destroyer's rule would be difficult at best, but not impossible. One possible solution for the Heroes would be to try to sabotage the development efforts and try to incite revolt?

The idea behind the story is that the LDCs, if organized under a strong leadership and armed with the ability to defend themselves, could gain considerable power in the world (Dependency Theory of Power). Destroyer could offer them such strong leadership and defense, at a cost that may seem to many to be lower than continuing in their present hopeless state of virtual slavery to the established powers of the economic north. While his plan may not work, it certainly has a real potential of working, which gives the heroes a bit of desperation to do something big to stop him.

Is that desperation big enough to work with an old nemesis like Eurostar??

Polaris

[Lord Liaden]

Polaris, did you ever read the story John Byrne wrote for the Fantastic Four in which the FF accompanied Dr. Doom on his quest to regain the throne of Latveria? Even they questioned whether the Latverian people hadn't been better off when Doom was in charge: they were prosperous, educated, their country was peaceful and stable. When those qualities were lost under the king (name escapes me) who replaced von Doom, the people wanted Doom back.

It sounds like you want Destroyer's plan to improve the well-being of the people he rules to succeed, but have world governments and/or PC heroes attack him anyway. You're even suggesting that the "heroes" sabotage beneficial reforms to incite revolt. How would you expect the PCs to justify that? How would you justify it to them? Dr. Destroyer may be a megalomaniac, but if he's actually improving people's lives, and they willingly allow him to do this, a lot of superheroes will have a great deal of trouble accepting the notion of interfering, at least without pressing evidence that the Dr.'s long-term goals are threatening.

Mind you, that very issue of benefit vs. threat, proof vs. accusation, past actions vs. present ones, could make for some interesting debates and disputes between PCs, or between the heroes and the government if the latter takes a more "self-interested" approach to dealing with Destroyer. Good fodder for role-playing. :)

[Scott Destroyer]

Hello,


Originally Posted by Polaris:
Upon getting a "sponsor" to allow him to speak, the Destroyer approached the podium and looked out at the stunned diplomats of the world. Representatives of the various nations of earth listened as the Destroyer announced a "new world order".

The man is wanted by UNTIL. He has destroyed a city, sunk warships of at least one UN member nation (and permanent Security Council member), and killed more superheroes than anyone else alive. He has not even the pretense of being a "spokesman for an oppressed people", or indeed any other expressed political agenda besides his own aggrandizement. He has ties to Hitler and the Third Reich. Menton, who probably has more than one of these people under his control, hates him. What makes you think anybody's "sponsorship" would make the slightest bit of difference in how Destroyer was handled, even assuming he could find someone willing to take the massive diplomatic and political risks of "sponsoring" him. Saddam Hussein, who destroyed no cities, was taken down despite being a recognized national leader with First World nations and long-time US allies running interference for him in the UN. And that's just governments. Superhuman vigilantes who have had friends murdered by Destroyer and his cronies will, I suspect, have much less concern for the diplomatic niceties than any foreign ministry.


Originally Posted by Polaris:
Several nations, seeking an end to their economic plight, and hoping for some protection from the intimidation of the world's only remaining superpower, joined immediately. Over the following several days, others followed suit.

Just which nations would these be? Nations sunk in chronic "economic plight" tend to be doctrinaire communist or socialist regimes, or lands torn with tribal or ethnic violence, or comprehensively corrupt dictatorships and oligarchies. Most rulers of such nations care little about "economic plight", except to the extent that it is a direct threat to their continued rule. Indeed, rulers in the lands wracked with insurrection tend to actively encourage "economic plight" in areas deemed insufficiently loyal to them. Such rulers, whatever other faults they may have, are generally cunning and ruthless veterans of vicious political infighting, often in places where the also-rans can count themselves lucky just to get something akin to the quick death Leon Trotsky got. And these are the guys who are going to roll over at the promise of some technological aid, or a few million more in the old Cayman Islands accounts, from a bombastic German octogenarian in a tin suit?

As to "intimidation", which regimes do you think believe they will get less intimidation from the US by sucking up to a guy like Destroyer?


Originally Posted by Polaris:
The new found willingness of the US government to flex its awesome military power had sent many nations scurrying for protection. Destroyer would allow many of the leaders to live a life of extreme wealth, luxuries, power and security... in exchange, they had to serve HIM (see the deal Rakshasa realized at the bottom of page 15 in CKC).

So these hardened maximum-leaders-for-life are going to "protect" their power by, de facto, turning it over to Destroyer? All in return for a luxurious lifestyle, which most of them (unlike Rakshasa) have already? And the other half of Rakshasa's deal is, "or I'll kill you." Is Destroyer going to threaten all these Third World leaders with outright murder? What will THAT do to his diplomatic status?


Originally Posted by Polaris:
With rule over a growing number of nations, the Destroyer began to shift the economic policies of many of the Lesser Developed nations toward the policies recommended by the Oraganization of African Unity

These nations apparently found such policies unacceptable even when ruled by one of their own. Why do you think they will suddenly become acceptable under rule from an outsider like Destroyer? Or will he force these policies on "his" people?


Originally Posted by Polaris:
Dauntless: I believe that Destroyer's ability to deter an attack by the United States would be sufficient to ensure he would not suffer the same fate as Saddam Hussein. I would suggest that the US (and other nations) is ultimately more concerned with self-preservation, than with saving a few nations from oppression from Destroyer.

He couldn't deter an attack on Destruga, which was packed to the brim with his vaunted technology. How is he going to defend an actual nation (or several, possibly non-contiguous), with borders the size of a real nation's? And Destroyer's army of 20,000 troops is chump change in the real war business. It's one division. Sufficient, under modern calculations, to defend perhaps ten kilometers of front line against a determined attack by a competent foe, if its flanks were secure - and that only for long enough to let reserves mount a counterattack. Destroyer could perhaps use the peasant conscript armies of the former rulers of his lands for static defensive work, and keep his own troops as a reserve. But Third World conscript armies barely rate as speed bumps before a large, modern, mobile combined-arms force.


Originally Posted by Polaris:
The difficulty is when Destroyer's new world order continues to grow. The US is dependent upon LDCs for much of our economic prosperity. Just by way of example, the US gets 70% of our industrial diamonds from Congo. Congo does not possess the ability to demand a higher price from the US and others because of fear of military retribution (we have invaded before when they had such 'communist' ideas). What would happen if we no longer had the ability to make such threats?

There are small nations and cartels of nations with near-monopolies on certain exotic minerals with industrial uses. But the forces setting the prices of those items are economic forces, not military forces. The Congo can demand any price for diamonds they want, and if their customers don't like it, then those who are supplying the other 30% of the diamonds will see nice increases in their orders, and their mines, shafts, and synthetic diamond production processes that would have been unprofitable at lower volume will now make them the beneficiaries of Congo's avarice. As for politics, could there be any idea LESS communist than exploiting your monopoly on a natural resource to raise prices obscenely? When communist regimes are attacked, from within or without, it is because the attackers loathe the ideas and methods, and frequently the personalities, of communism, not for specific price breaks on specific items. The idea of launching a war over a few percentage points difference in the price of diamonds is so absurd as to be laughable (which, admittedly, would probably get it approved as a major story arc in a Denny O'Neill book).


Originally Posted by Polaris:
The idea behind the story is that the LDCs, if organized under a strong leadership and armed with the ability to defend themselves, could gain considerable power in the world (Dependency Theory of Power). Destroyer could offer them such strong leadership and defense, at a cost that may seem to many to be lower than continuing in their present hopeless state of virtual slavery to the established powers of the economic north.

"Virtual slavery"? Yeah, Mobutu, Kanunda, and Mugabe (to name just three) were living in conditions comparable to those of Mississippi field hands circa 1859 - NOT. And the fact that many of these peoples won't put up with "strong leadership" from outsiders, even ones of the same skin color, is the cause of much of the trouble in many of these nations today. How does Destroyer plan to deal with that? The same way his old buddy Hitler did in the Balkans, by picking a local ally and giving him weapons and a free hand to massacre his opponents wholesale? If intervening in such a Rwanda-like situation would have given the US an opportunity to grab an enemy who had done them as much harm as Destroyer has, I could about guarantee they'd have intervened.

The entire scenario just seems thoroughly un-Destroyer-like. I could see him conquering Third World countries. I could see Third World countries offering to work with him, exchanging his technology for diplomatic cover and bases. But I can't see Destroyer haggling with anybody, even in bad faith - to bargain with someone acknowledges near-equality, which Destroyer would almost never do, and certainly not with people he would view as tinhorn dictators of backwards low-rent nations. I can't see him caring much about diplomacy or whether others like him. And I can't see the rulers taking "deals" that would cost them their actual power over the nations they rule, no matter what they were promised, 60 PRE or not, unless they were actually threatened with immediate death - and maybe not even then.


Originally Posted by Lord Liaden:
did you ever read the story John Byrne wrote for the Fantastic Four in which the FF accompanied Dr. Doom on his quest to regain the throne of Latveria?

I seem to remember this; this would have been to retake Latveria after Doom's contingency heir, Kristoff, took over after Doom's apparent death at the hands of Terrax and the Silver Surfer. Kristoff's mind was "imprinted" with Doom's personality and intellect, making him a formidable opponent.

I also seem to remember, vaguely, a graphic novel in which Doom succeeds in taking over the world, using a device that amplified the Purple Man's mind control powers. If I remember rightly, his rule was overthrown by a few people immune to the control, including Ultron (a robot), and possibly Wonder Man (ionic energy body), and at least one other - maybe Namor? This graphic novel might also bear some relevance to the discussion; does anyone else remember any more of the details?

[assault]

Originally posted by Lord Liaden
Good fodder for role-playing. :)

It certainly is. It inspired me to finish writing up my 350 point version of Ultra Man, the hero I would want to play in this kind of game. (A cross between Ultra Boy and Superman, of course.) This is when I should be doing a bunch of other things, including writing up villains for a game I am planning.

<sigh>

I don't know that my game would have room for such hugely world-changing events, at least at first. Then again, on a smaller scale... Something like this would be a good way of getting players thinking, arguing, and kicking some serious bottom.

Getting back to the actual scenario in question: of course, if one supervillain takeover succeeds, it could well lead to others. In addition, if warfare starts to become superpowered, superheroes might start becoming seen as more legitimate rules of more or less democratic states as well. Just think, what if Invictus and Borealis were elected to lead the US and Canada respectively through this kind of desperate crisis? Presumably they would sort out their differences in order to unite against Dr D.

Memo to Steve and Darren: please bring back Invictus and Borealis! Especially since Golden Avenger Kaufman is out of the way.

On the other hand, is Kaufman dead? If he's just retired, he might go into politics... That would be evil, wouldn't it?

Anyway, a world where rival supers start ruling norms on a large scale would certainly be... interesting...

It could get very Iron Age very quickly. And then it could get very Stone Age. :)

Oh yeah. It works for me.

Alan

[chariot]

This was interesting.

What a wonderful rebuttal from Scott.

Certainly amazing that a thread so obviously polarized and politically charged could stay above the level of name calling (got to admit, I was tempted to fling around a few choice epithets while reading).

The original hypothesis is extremely 4 color, even if it does blend in some real world theory. Scott's rebuttal is far more Iron age, and relies more on real world practicalities than theory. In essence, the two best comments in the thread (the topic starter and the wonderful rebuttal) are at complete odds with each other -- they exist in different worlds. One is far too simplistic to be real, but would make for a wonderfully entertaining story (the true goal of our shared obsession, no?); the other, wonderfully written and reflective of a more real-world take on the hypothesis. One left, one right...:D

[starblaze]

Originally posted by Scott Destroyer
Hello,



The man is wanted by UNTIL. He has destroyed a city, sunk warships of at least one UN member nation (and permanent Security Council member), and killed more superheroes than anyone else alive. He has not even the pretense of being a "spokesman for an oppressed people", or indeed any other expressed political agenda besides his own aggrandizement. He has ties to Hitler and the Third Reich. Menton, who probably has more than one of these people under his control, hates him. What makes you think anybody's "sponsorship" would make the slightest bit of difference in how Destroyer was handled, even assuming he could find someone willing to take the massive diplomatic and political risks of "sponsoring" him. Saddam Hussein, who destroyed no cities, was taken down despite being a recognized national leader with First World nations and long-time US allies running interference for him in the UN. And that's just governments. Superhuman vigilantes who have had friends murdered by Destroyer and his cronies will, I suspect, have much less concern for the diplomatic niceties than any foreign ministry.



Just which nations would these be? Nations sunk in chronic "economic plight" tend to be doctrinaire communist or socialist regimes, or lands torn with tribal or ethnic violence, or comprehensively corrupt dictatorships and oligarchies. Most rulers of such nations care little about "economic plight", except to the extent that it is a direct threat to their continued rule. Indeed, rulers in the lands wracked with insurrection tend to actively encourage "economic plight" in areas deemed insufficiently loyal to them. Such rulers, whatever other faults they may have, are generally cunning and ruthless veterans of vicious political infighting, often in places where the also-rans can count themselves lucky just to get something akin to the quick death Leon Trotsky got. And these are the guys who are going to roll over at the promise of some technological aid, or a few million more in the old Cayman Islands accounts, from a bombastic German octogenarian in a tin suit?

As to "intimidation", which regimes do you think believe they will get less intimidation from the US by sucking up to a guy like Destroyer?



So these hardened maximum-leaders-for-life are going to "protect" their power by, de facto, turning it over to Destroyer? All in return for a luxurious lifestyle, which most of them (unlike Rakshasa) have already? And the other half of Rakshasa's deal is, "or I'll kill you." Is Destroyer going to threaten all these Third World leaders with outright murder? What will THAT do to his diplomatic status?



These nations apparently found such policies unacceptable even when ruled by one of their own. Why do you think they will suddenly become acceptable under rule from an outsider like Destroyer? Or will he force these policies on "his" people?



He couldn't deter an attack on Destruga, which was packed to the brim with his vaunted technology. How is he going to defend an actual nation (or several, possibly non-contiguous), with borders the size of a real nation's? And Destroyer's army of 20,000 troops is chump change in the real war business. It's one division. Sufficient, under modern calculations, to defend perhaps ten kilometers of front line against a determined attack by a competent foe, if its flanks were secure - and that only for long enough to let reserves mount a counterattack. Destroyer could perhaps use the peasant conscript armies of the former rulers of his lands for static defensive work, and keep his own troops as a reserve. But Third World conscript armies barely rate as speed bumps before a large, modern, mobile combined-arms force.



There are small nations and cartels of nations with near-monopolies on certain exotic minerals with industrial uses. But the forces setting the prices of those items are economic forces, not military forces. The Congo can demand any price for diamonds they want, and if their customers don't like it, then those who are supplying the other 30% of the diamonds will see nice increases in their orders, and their mines, shafts, and synthetic diamond production processes that would have been unprofitable at lower volume will now make them the beneficiaries of Congo's avarice. As for politics, could there be any idea LESS communist than exploiting your monopoly on a natural resource to raise prices obscenely? When communist regimes are attacked, from within or without, it is because the attackers loathe the ideas and methods, and frequently the personalities, of communism, not for specific price breaks on specific items. The idea of launching a war over a few percentage points difference in the price of diamonds is so absurd as to be laughable (which, admittedly, would probably get it approved as a major story arc in a Denny O'Neill book).



"Virtual slavery"? Yeah, Mobutu, Kanunda, and Mugabe (to name just three) were living in conditions comparable to those of Mississippi field hands circa 1859 - NOT. And the fact that many of these peoples won't put up with "strong leadership" from outsiders, even ones of the same skin color, is the cause of much of the trouble in many of these nations today. How does Destroyer plan to deal with that? The same way his old buddy Hitler did in the Balkans, by picking a local ally and giving him weapons and a free hand to massacre his opponents wholesale? If intervening in such a Rwanda-like situation would have given the US an opportunity to grab an enemy who had done them as much harm as Destroyer has, I could about guarantee they'd have intervened.

The entire scenario just seems thoroughly un-Destroyer-like. I could see him conquering Third World countries. I could see Third World countries offering to work with him, exchanging his technology for diplomatic cover and bases. But I can't see Destroyer haggling with anybody, even in bad faith - to bargain with someone acknowledges near-equality, which Destroyer would almost never do, and certainly not with people he would view as tinhorn dictators of backwards low-rent nations. I can't see him caring much about diplomacy or whether others like him. And I can't see the rulers taking "deals" that would cost them their actual power over the nations they rule, no matter what they were promised, 60 PRE or not, unless they were actually threatened with immediate death - and maybe not even then.



I seem to remember this; this would have been to retake Latveria after Doom's contingency heir, Kristoff, took over after Doom's apparent death at the hands of Terrax and the Silver Surfer. Kristoff's mind was "imprinted" with Doom's personality and intellect, making him a formidable opponent.

I also seem to remember, vaguely, a graphic novel in which Doom succeeds in taking over the world, using a device that amplified the Purple Man's mind control powers. If I remember rightly, his rule was overthrown by a few people immune to the control, including Ultron (a robot), and possibly Wonder Man (ionic energy body), and at least one other - maybe Namor? This graphic novel might also bear some relevance to the discussion; does anyone else remember any more of the details?

i think the Dr. Doom tale that was mentioned was the one where a Prince Zarkov? takes over Lavteria with the FF's help. The FF then find out that things were much worse when Doom was deposed and crime and suffering ran rampant. The FF help Doom take back his land and he kills Zarkov.

[death tribble]

It also depends on whether you use the Champions History as written or adapt it for your campaign world.

It has a nice theme but would depend on whether you had Destroyer as the one responsible for the battle of Detroit.

Anything is possible if you make the logic convincing enough and if it fits what has gone before.

[Jeff]

Originally posted by death tribble
It also depends on whether you use the Champions History as written or adapt it for your campaign world.

It has a nice theme but would depend on whether you had Destroyer as the one responsible for the battle of Detroit.

Anything is possible if you make the logic convincing enough and if it fits what has gone before.
A variation on the idea - albeit an extreme one - might be to replace Dr. Destroyer with Warlord and a U.N. announced manifesto with broad but not public sponsorship of semi-controlled sympathetic revolutionary movements culminating in an alliance of Third World Nations enjoying an economic and technological renaissance under Warlord's thumb. At the very worst, it gets him customers, troop training, and notoriety in the meantime.

Hostile factions after the plan comes together include but needn't be limited to the Eurostar/VIPER/First World governments looking to put things back the way they were; revolutionaries and heroes outside the Establishment interested in keeping the assertive, united, and progressive new Third World and removing the new Alexander from the top of it; and various other villains just looking to move into his spot out of sheer ambition and/or other agendas. Dr. D himself would fit obviously in the third category, though nothing stops him from trying to fake membership in one of the first two.

[lemming]

Originally posted by Scott Destroyer
I also seem to remember, vaguely, a graphic novel in which Doom succeeds in taking over the world, using a device that amplified the Purple Man's mind control powers. If I remember rightly, his rule was overthrown by a few people immune to the control, including Ultron (a robot), and possibly Wonder Man (ionic energy body), and at least one other - maybe Namor? This graphic novel might also bear some relevance to the discussion; does anyone else remember any more of the details?
Namor was a puppet, but was able to break free at the end. He destroyed the machine and killed the Purple Man in the process.
I don't remember Ultron being involved, I'll have to look and see. I know I've got the book in my shelf.

[Jinx999]

I was going to say something, but Scott beat me to it and did it better than I could.
The whole idea presupposed that the rulers of the failed states cared about the well being of their people rather than their own wealth and power or failed ideaology.
As an aside - I think Dr. D in CKC is grossly overpowered. His powers are too brute force. I think a master villian should be more. "I wish we could get this guy in our sights, but he always slips through our fingers." rather than "I'm glad we've never met the guy, he could kill us easily."

[tiger]

Originally posted by Jinx999
As an aside - I think Dr. D in CKC is grossly overpowered. His powers are too brute force. I think a master villian should be more. "I wish we could get this guy in our sights, but he always slips through our fingers." rather than "I'm glad we've never met the guy, he could kill us easily."

He's very comic book. Doc. Doom can take on the FF or Avengers single handedly or stay behind the scenes and cause problems. This is what DR. D can do as well, while he can stand toe-to-toe with the best of them he tends to let others do his work for him.

While would a man who can make awesome suits for others not make one for himself

Besides you can always tone him down to match your campaign

[Polaris]

Sorry, I do not know how to break the quote up, so I will put my responses in brackets. Many of your points are very good, but there are a few things that I think you may be overlooking.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Scott Destroyer
Hello,

[Hi...:)]

The man is wanted by UNTIL. He has destroyed a city, sunk warships of at least one UN member nation (and permanent Security Council member), and killed more superheroes than anyone else alive. He has not even the pretense of being a "spokesman for an oppressed people", or indeed any other expressed political agenda besides his own aggrandizement. He has ties to Hitler and the Third Reich. Menton, who probably has more than one of these people under his control, hates him. What makes you think anybody's "sponsorship" would make the slightest bit of difference in how Destroyer was handled, even assuming he could find someone willing to take the massive diplomatic and political risks of "sponsoring" him.

[Yeah, the Destroyer is a bad man. Sponsorship by a country could earn him the right to speak. The principle reason for placing it in the UNGA is that all nations have the right to put forth their own spokespeople, and that no government can be silenced. I believe many governments would be more than willing to hear him. Please remember, as harsh as this may sound, the US has destroyed a whole lot more cities than Dr. Destroyer has... the US worked with some of the worse despots in modern history... and the US has killed a whole lot of people too. We would be more offended by Dr. Destroyer doing it because he did it to a city and to people we like.]

Saddam Hussein, who destroyed no cities, was taken down despite being a recognized national leader with First World nations and long-time US allies running interference for him in the UN. And that's just governments. Superhuman vigilantes who have had friends murdered by Destroyer and his cronies will, I suspect, have much less concern for the diplomatic niceties than any foreign ministry.

[Such superhuman cronies, I would suggest, are free to attempt an attack on Destroyer... I would suggest that UNTIL and others would do their best to not allow an attack within the headquarters of the UN, perhaps especially against a member's spokesperson/representative. As to attacking him after he left, being the GM, I would have had him teleport out of the building].



Just which nations would these be? Nations sunk in chronic "economic plight" tend to be doctrinaire communist or socialist regimes, or lands torn with tribal or ethnic violence, or comprehensively corrupt dictatorships and oligarchies.

[Nations that understand that economic stability is one of the main determinants of political stability, and political stability helps keep them in power. The nations that understand that economic power is the genesis of all power, and if they desire power--as most nations do--they will be inclined to look favorably upon increasing their economic power. Also, nations that do not want to be the ones left out. If you are the leader of Nigeria, for example, you are a power in your neighborhood. If one or more of your neighbors were to begin to get far more economic power, better training for their troops, the most advanced weapons technology in the world, and an 'enforcer' that you do not want to peeve off, and you don't get these things... guess what? Your power and national sovereignty is put at the mercy of your neighbors. Power is relative... if your neighbors increase in power, you need to increase in it as well. I wish I could write more about this... there is an author by the name of Hans Morgenthau... those of you interested in the study of power among nations know him well. I would highly recommend his writings.]

Most rulers of such nations care little about "economic plight", except to the extent that it is a direct threat to their continued rule.

[It is a direct threat to their continued rule. Regardless of a despot's wealth or power, they tend to want more. This is one of the reasons why many have sold themselves to bigger powers for military and economic aid and protection... perhaps they are not overly concerned about the plight of their people, but few such dictators would not understand how the economic shortcommings of their country do affect them greatly].

Such rulers, whatever other faults they may have, are generally cunning and ruthless veterans of vicious political infighting, often in places where the also-rans can count themselves lucky just to get something akin to the quick death Leon Trotsky got.

[Well said...:) These "cunning and ruthless veterans of vicious political infighting" would likely be quite willing to keep themselves atop their societies, and atop their regions even if it means selling their souls to Dr. Destroyer].

And these are the guys who are going to roll over at the promise of some technological aid, or a few million more in the old Cayman Islands accounts, from a bombastic German octogenarian in a tin suit?

[Just like they do it now to the US and other world powers. The idea of power hungry dictators that want absolute rule selling their allegiance and service to a bigger power is not a new concept. History is replete with examples of this happening. It truly is part of the 'game'. The 'economic south' is ruled by those best able to sell themselves to the north.]


As to "intimidation", which regimes do you think believe they will get less intimidation from the US by sucking up to a guy like Destroyer?

[Those, such as North Korea and Iran, that have observed that the US treats nations with things like WMD MUCH BETTER than the US treats nations that do not have such an ability to hurt the US. As a nation's ability to hurt the US increases, the US becomes more interested in "diplomacy", and is less willing to force its will on them.]



So these hardened maximum-leaders-for-life are going to "protect" their power by, de facto, turning it over to Destroyer? All in return for a luxurious lifestyle, which most of them (unlike Rakshasa) have already?

[See comments about already staying in power by selling their allegiance to a bigger power. This is certainly not new}.

And the other half of Rakshasa's deal is, "or I'll kill you." Is Destroyer going to threaten all these Third World leaders with outright murder?

[Dr. Destroyer commit "outright murder"? See your first paragraph... any leader that would not believe a threat that he would be willing to murder them probably should be removed from the gene pool before he/she breeds :) ].

What will THAT do to his diplomatic status?

[I refer you to your earlier comments about his 'diplomatic status'... he is already viewed by many as a bad person, killer, etc. However, I would suggest that, just as the US is able to kill far more than a few leaders, attack population centers/cities, etc., that a willingness to use power in unfriendly ways does not preclude one from diplomatic power.]



These nations apparently found such policies unacceptable even when ruled by one of their own. Why do you think they will suddenly become acceptable under rule from an outsider like Destroyer? Or will he force these policies on "his" people?

[Lesser Developed Countries (or LDCs) have not tried to implement the conclusions from the OAU (Organization for African Unity). To do so would threaten military retribution from the US and/or others (ala Congo when they threatened our industrial diamond supply in the early 1960s). The situation would be changed when the US would face massive retalliation for attacking a member of the new world order].


He couldn't deter an attack on Destruga, which was packed to the brim with his vaunted technology. How is he going to defend an actual nation (or several, possibly non-contiguous), with borders the size of a real nation's? And Destroyer's army of 20,000 troops is chump change in the real war business. It's one division. Sufficient, under modern calculations, to defend perhaps ten kilometers of front line against a determined attack by a competent foe, if its flanks were secure - and that only for long enough to let reserves mount a counterattack.

[The 20,000 you refer to are up to 300 points a piece! That is a bit more than just a division of standard grunt troops. I am unsure of your campaign, but in our campaign that would be EXTREMELY difficult to confront. You seem to be schooled in the military--I'm sure that you could probably come up with an impressive list of instances when QUALITY of troops meant more than the QUANTITY. I will throw in one example: In Gulf War One, we were outnumbered 16 divisions to 14. General Schwartzkopf made mention that military calculations that the attacker should outnumber the defender by a ratio of 3:1, and given the fortifications of the Iraqi defenders, the ratio should be closer to 5:1 (SEE "The Briefing" by the General, available on videotape at some libraries). The coalition won with superior firepower, discipline, and superior troops. I would suggest that our troops (as great as I think they are) are NOT 300 points supermen.]

Destroyer could perhaps use the peasant conscript armies of the former rulers of his lands for static defensive work, and keep his own troops as a reserve. But Third World conscript armies barely rate as speed bumps before a large, modern, mobile combined-arms force.

[Over half of our Army right now is in Iraq or Afghanistan fighting such peasant conscripts. The Army Chief of Staff told the Senate Armed Services committee that he believes the US needs to INCREASE it's presence from 148,000 to 'hundreds of thousands', and leave them there for 'several years'. The US could take any one, maybe two, of these 'peasant armies'... trying to attack too many more--while having to defend the US from the real threat that the US might be the real military target of Dr. Destroyer, or that VIPER or others may take advantage of the US being off fighting Dr. Destroyer cronie armies--would be outside of the capability of the US military for some time. Our ability to prepare for such a fight, ironically, would also depend upon such things as a steady supply of industrial diamonds, and other natural resources that we get from some of the very nations we would be threatening to invade].

There are small nations and cartels of nations with near-monopolies on certain exotic minerals with industrial uses. But the forces setting the prices of those items are economic forces, not military forces.

[Access to natural resources has long been determined by political and military means. In the early 1960s, the Congo attempted to demand a higher price for their diamonds.. the US accused the government of being communists trying to destabilize the American economy, and invaded.]

The Congo can demand any price for diamonds they want, and if their customers don't like it, then <<snip>>

[they invade :)]

As for politics, could there be any idea LESS communist than exploiting your monopoly on a natural resource to raise prices obscenely? When communist regimes are attacked, from within or without, it is because the attackers loathe the ideas and methods, and frequently the personalities, of communism, not for specific price breaks on specific items. The idea of launching a war over a few percentage points difference in the price of diamonds is so absurd as to be laughable (which, admittedly, would probably get it approved as a major story arc in a Denny O'Neill book).

[2 responses to this one:

1. This would seem to make Dr. Destroyer's plan more workable. If the US would not go to war over Dr. Destroyer raising the prices on these commodities, even if Dr. Destroyer has a monopoly and could therefore threaten the economic health of the US economy, then he would not need to worry so much about the military balance or calculations.

2. Yes, it is sad... and if it was not so tragic that such wars happen, it would also be 'laughable'. However, we have fought wars over the price of oil. Was that laughable? We have fought wars over the price of industrial diamonds. Was that laughable? Governments (even our own) have fought wars over things that probably shouldn't have justified a war.]



"Virtual slavery"? Yeah, Mobutu, Kanunda, and Mugabe (to name just three) were living in conditions comparable to those of Mississippi field hands circa 1859 - NOT.

[I would suggest that the people of many of the lesser developed world live in conditions no better, and often worse, than the Mississippi field hands you refer to. The 'Virtual slavery' is living as a servant to the economic north. The actual slavery suffered by the blacks in the old south is not the only standard of slavery.]

And the fact that many of these peoples won't put up with "strong leadership" from outsiders, even ones of the same skin color, is the cause of much of the trouble in many of these nations today.

[I am unsure what you mean by this section. Perhaps more explanation if you have a few moments... I would suggest that many people will follow leaders that can deliver a better life for them].

If intervening in such a Rwanda-like situation would have given the US an opportunity to grab an enemy who had done them as much harm as Destroyer has, I could about guarantee they'd have intervened.

[If Rwanda was part of the new world order, and intervening would threaten massive retaliation against US cities, I could about guarantee they'd NOT intervene. The US didn't want to intervene when doing so was fighting some of those 'peasants' you referred to earlier, why would we intervene if we were confronted with a truly deterring threat? I'm afraid I don't understand this one either...]

The entire scenario just seems thoroughly un-Destroyer-like.

[I respect your opinion on that. Dr. Destroyer is a student of power, and brilliant beyond much comparison. He rarely likes to soil himself with the menial use of fighting to get what he wants. He is far more prone to use his mind than direct force to accomplish his desire of conquest (which is one of the things that makes him such a big threat). See page 9 of the CKC book for what I mean. A man of that brilliance would likely know that conquering the world, and then trying to hold it, would be a fool's game. He developed and built his suit because he knew that he had to account for the superheroes of the world, heroes that often respect the rule of law and the governments (even dictators). He could easily surmise that they would be less likely to act against him, as some in this thread have pointed out.

The people have already grown accustomed to being oppressed by dictatorships--a well trained population would be a good target for Destroyer.

The militaries of these nations have plenty of fodder to hold fire while his superior troops chooses the point of attack and moves against the enemy. This is similar to his tactical sense in a superpowered fight--he blasts and observes, then when the enemy has made their move, if necessary he adopts a superior tactic and uses it to defeat his foes (again, see p. 9 of CKC).

These nations have an enormous untapped power source (natural resources) that the US and others are highly dependent upon.

These nations would also be most likely to enter the new world order.

I believe Dr. Destroyer would see these things, and seize the opportunity. I think it would be very much like him.

Polaris

PS: Very good post, btw..:)

[Polaris]

Okay, GREAT comments! :) How about this, as the story goes on: The heroes, wanting to stop Dr. Destroyer move to try to "liberate" the people from the oppression of Dr. Destroyer. As they do so, they find a people that do not want "liberation". Their lives are being improved.

Do they continue to fight Dr. Destroyer (at least one poster suggested that if Dr. Destroyer is improving the lives of these people, then the heroes should leave it alone)? Would any heroes seek to take political power upon themselves to save the people from the oppression of Destroyer, while still improving their lot?

Since Destroyer's plan would likely include continuing to raise the prices of vitally needed natural resources and draining wealth from the economic north, at what point would the heroes intervene (or would they)?

A lot of places you could go with this... I had actually thought it might be good to introduce some relatively new players to the world of Champions. If the heroes took the alliance to stop Dr. Destroyer, then at the end of the story arc, Eurostar would do some particularly nasty betrayal of the heroes (thus setting Eurostar up as the team's main arch nemesis... I like that).

Thanks everyone for the comments!! :):)

Polaris

[Polaris]

I just wanted to add that this is not really based upon my prediction of "this is what 192 diplomats at the United Nations WOULD do in this situation". I suggest that this is a plausible course of events that would present an interesting choice for the players. I tend to like to run stories that give the players choices that question/challenge their values or puts them into a decision ("do we work with Eurostar", for example).

Polaris

[Broblawsky]

I think you guys may be forgetting something. Destroyer is nothing like Saddam Hussein. He's Osama Bin Laden, only a thousand times worse; I don't know what the civilian death toll of the Battle of Detroit was, but it must have been something huge. Think about it! Do you seriously think that we wouldn't simply try our damned-est to wipe out any country that proved to be willing to host Destroyer, via any means necessary? Even if it meant retaliation on a massive scale? Seriously, any country stupid enough to host Destroyer and willing submit to hs rule - publicly, no less! - would be wiped out by a coalition of pretty much every other country in the world. Destroyer isn't just a threat to the status quo, he's a terrorist mass-murderer with no equal in our world. Destroyer's organization must be far more feared than Al Qaeda, and look how far we'll go to remove threats like that! Not only is this hugely OOC for Destroyer, but any megalomaniacal supervillian like him - including the Warlord (don't forget, he tried to frickin' conquer VIETNAM) - would be pretty much wiped from the face of the earth the second they tried anything like this, via nuclear means if necessary.

[assault]

Well, to be honest, all I have seen so far is testimonies to the brilliance of the Doctor's plan.

A few android duplicates in the right place, and people start saying things that boil down to "we had to destroy civilisation in order to save it."

What I really want to know is: is Dr D really behind this, or is it Mechanon? After all, the extinction of humanity does seem to be on the agenda.

Of course, a lot of the problem is that most of us aren't really world-conquering geniuses. Apparently this can make comprehending the Master Plan a little difficult.

:)

Alan

[Polaris]

As to the destruction of Detroit, I do not have the Millenium City book.. this could be prior to that occurring, or it could be that he would not do it (given his present plan).

Polaris

[Deacon Blues]

Originally posted by Polaris
Do they continue to fight Dr. Destroyer (at least one poster suggested that if Dr. Destroyer is improving the lives of these people, then the heroes should leave it alone)? I originally read this as "poster," meaning "glossy paper with a picture mounted on a wall," not "message board participant." I had some great ideas for pro-Doctor propaganda pieces as a result:

A stylized drawing of the Doctor standing with his arm on the shoulder of a young African man in fatigues carrying an assault rifle, with a gaggle of hopeful-looking peasant children behind him. Caption: Join Me In DESTROYING Poverty!

The Doctor in flight, smashing a British bomber jet with an armored fist while shooting down several missiles with an energy blast. A desert and several mosque minarets in the background set the scene as distinctly Mid-Eastern. Caption: Join Me In DESTROYING Injustice!

Dr. Destroyer, standing with his arms crossed in front of a South American rainforest, with several American soldiers touting AK-47s facing him in shock in the extreme foreground. Caption: Your Reign of Terror Stops Where Mine Begins! (okay, that one's somewhat ironic)

[Polaris]

Deacon Blues,

LOL!! :):)

Polaris

[Tim]

This whole plotline sounds much more like Istal Vahn (sp?) than Dr. D.
AND she could easily get the time to speak at the UN (not being a wanted murderer) and she can bring in much more than 20,000 (I think that was the number being bantied about) crack troops.

[Tim]

This whole plotline sounds much more like Istal Vahn (sp?) than Dr. D.
AND she could easily get the time to speak at the UN (not being a wanted murderer) and she can bring in much more than 20,000 (I think that was the number being bantied about) crack troops.

[Polaris]

Tim,

You certainly could use the Empress of a Billion dimensions. I would personally use Dr. D because of the characters' background and knowlege of him, and save the beyond awesome resources of Istal Vahn (sp?) for another story.

Polaris

[Tim]

But this gives her a base in our deminsion, so she can build up her forces for the conquering of the entire galaxy. Just think Rwanda joins her and all of a sudden they are competing against NASA in the space race (and probably winning)

[Tim]

But this gives her a base in our deminsion, so she can build up her forces for the conquering of the entire galaxy. Just think Rwanda joins her and all of a sudden they are competing against NASA in the space race (and probably winning)

[GamePhil]

Originally posted by Polaris
You certainly could use the Empress of a Billion dimensions. I would personally use Dr. D because of the characters' background and knowlege of him, and save the beyond awesome resources of Istal Vahn (sp?) for another story.

Besides, it's something Doctor Doom would do, not Dormammu. It should be Dr. Destroyer.

I only did that first sentence to say Do several times...

[GamePhil]

With a duck, a priest, and a rabbi...

Sounds like a perfectly reasonable comic book plot. Probably totally implausible in the real world, yes, but how about this: Destroyer has Menton on his side for this project (called in a big favor), subtly manipulating the minds of the UN and others. Knowing that something is fishy, but unable to do anything about it without proof, our heroes must stand by, helpless. Of course, the Destroyer eventually proves an able ruler, and then the heroes can do nothing because more people would be hurt. Or, they would be forced to do the unpopular but right thing... And so on.

Of course, the two are using each other: Destroyer's full plans will come into fruition later, while Menton believes he is using Destroyer as a distraction from his more subtle machinations. And they both know this. It could get hairy.

[MisterD]

And while Dr. D. and Menton are using eachother, Foxbat is rubbing his hands together.

"Heee heeee. Part 124b subsection 76zeta of my master plan is working nicely."


Ps I did the mistake of saving my Avatar as my screen background and tiled it.

wow

[GamePhil]

Originally posted by MisterD
And while Dr. D. and Menton are using eachother, Foxbat is rubbing his hands together.


This goes without saying, of course :D

[Thirdbase]

So if I understood this correctly, Dr. D has done here that is illegal. The heroes could go after him for past offenses, but what he is currently doing is perfectly legal.

[Scott Destroyer]

Hi again,


Originally Posted by Polaris:
Please remember, as harsh as this may sound, the US has destroyed a whole lot more cities than Dr. Destroyer has... the US worked with some of the worse despots in modern history... and the US has killed a whole lot of people too.

Nation-states have always held that other nation-states have the right to do these things in time of war, following certain rules, and in their own defense or in other prescribed circumstances. None has ever acknowledged that private citizens, working under no color of national authority, have any right to do so. Such persons have always been regarded, at most, as bandit chieftains. If Destroyer could have submerged his ego for long enough to pretend to be the champion of some "oppressed people", he could probably have garnered a fair bit of support. In a sense, that's exactly what this UN gambit of yours is. If you're setting things in standard "current-day" CU, though, it would already seem far too late for that. He has too much blood on his hands for less "altruistic" reasons, and they know him too well already to fall for such an act.


Originally Posted by Polaris:
I would suggest that UNTIL and others would do their best to not allow an attack within the headquarters of the UN, perhaps especially against a member's spokesperson/representative.

I'm sure he'll be guarded at least as well as Lee Harvey Oswald was...


Originally Posted by Polaris:
Nations that understand that economic stability is one of the main determinants of political stability, and political stability helps keep them in power.

I have no doubt that Third World rulers would happily accept economic assistance and any other assistance Destroyer would offer them. I have huge doubts that they would bargain away their actual power to get such assistance, though.


Originally posted by Polaris:
Well said... These "cunning and ruthless veterans of vicious political infighting" would likely be quite willing to keep themselves atop their societies, and atop their regions even if it means selling their souls to Dr. Destroyer

Thank you :)! But the question I have in mind is, would they really BE "atop their societies" if Destroyer is the one giving the real orders? I don't think they would be, and I don't think they would think they would be, either. They would go from enjoying both the trappings and the actuality of power, to just having the trappings (at most), and I'm sure they'd know it. And without the power, you only keep the trappings at the whim of whoever does have the power; I'm sure they'd know this too, and it wouldn't please them.


Originally Posted by Polaris:
Just like they do it now to the US and other world powers. The idea of power hungry dictators that want absolute rule selling their allegiance and service to a bigger power is not a new concept.

The US isn't ruling any nations except ones that they've outright conquered, and they certainly seem leery about staying in even those for long enough to give a reasonable expectation of long-term stability. Yes, nations cozy up to superpower sugar-daddys. That's a far cry from letting them take over. The US can't even get their clients the Saudis to openly allow Christian chaplains on US bases on Saudi soil. Do you think that is the level of control Destroyer will be satisfied with, the level that will let him carry out his grandiose plans?


Originally Posted by Polaris:
Those, such as North Korea and Iran, that have observed that the US treats nations with things like WMD MUCH BETTER than the US treats nations that do not have such an ability to hurt the US. As a nation's ability to hurt the US increases, the US becomes more interested in "diplomacy", and is less willing to force its will on them.

Only two strategic opponents of the US have had nuclear weapons capability before the North Koreans: the Soviet Union and China. Neither is a nation that the US has any chance at all of conquering in open war, whether they have WMD or not. Yet even these two nations have been placed under various none-too-subtle diplomatic and political pressures from the US. For North Korea to presume that a few nukes, for which they have no delivery systems that can threaten the continental US, would put them in the same league as Russia or China is pure idiocy (which is not to say they don't presume exactly that).


Originally Posted by Polaris:
Dr. Destroyer commit "outright murder"? See your first paragraph... any leader that would not believe a threat that he would be willing to murder them probably should be removed from the gene pool before he/she breeds

Exactly, now this I could believe. Destroyer murdering Third World leaders and taking over their countries. What I have more trouble buying is the idea that he would bother giving them an alternative (especially one involving nominal equality or near-equality with him), or bother with the whole diplomatic rigamarole.


Originally Posted by Polaris:
Lesser Developed Countries (or LDCs) have not tried to implement the conclusions from the OAU (Organization for African Unity). To do so would threaten military retribution from the US and/or others (ala Congo when they threatened our industrial diamond supply in the early 1960s). The situation would be changed when the US would face massive retalliation for attacking a member of the new world order

I have a very hard time seeing that any internal economic policy short of outright thievery (uncompensated "nationalization") or the breaking of international treaties would result in war. The UN intervention in the Congo in the early '60s had more to do with mutinies, coups, secessions, and rebellions than diamonds. And if Destroyer really does already have a retaliatory capability massive enough to deter the US, why is he even bothering with diplomacy and Third World nations?


Originally Posted by Polaris:
The 20,000 you refer to are up to 300 points a piece! That is a bit more than just a division of standard grunt troops. I am unsure of your campaign, but in our campaign that would be EXTREMELY difficult to confront.

300 points is higher than the Low-Powered Superheroic range. But these troops are not going to be superheroes, they are going to be agents with above-average agent equipment. SPD in the 3-4 range, defenses 9-15, with about half of that Resistant. And real-world militaries are hardly ill-equipped themselves. A single automatic grenade launcher, of the sort mounted on every US Marine amtrac, as well as many other vehicles, runs about 120 Active Points. Destroyer's Black Talons, with PD and ED 18, will stand up about as well as a real tank to a TOW missile (6d6 RKA AP, for about 12 BODY per hit to a Black Talon). Destroyer's toys may be superior individually, but so were German tanks and equipment in World War II. And I don't doubt that any forces opposed to Destroyer will have superhuman assistance of their own. Not necessarily "heroic" assistance, either; you yourself pointed out the willingness of governments to work with lowlifes at least temporarily in their own interest, and you also pointed out the opposition of VIPER and EUROSTAR to Destroyer... Brings to mind one of my favorite old comics, DC's Suicide Squad. :D


Originally Posted by Polaris:
Over half of our Army right now is in Iraq or Afghanistan fighting such peasant conscripts.

They are not fighting conscripts, or any other soldiers; they are fighting terrorist cells. The troops are not there to fight a war - which they've already done, and very quickly - they are there to hunt down particular individuals, and keep Iraq intact until its own army can be rebuilt from a tool of the previous regime into something resembling a professional, apolitical force. They are not staying several years because they might suddenly lose the capital to enemy forces, they are staying because they expect it will take that long for the terrorists - who, hidden as they are among the civilian population, have the initiative - to launch enough attacks to deplete themselves into ineffectiveness. WIth a bit of luck, they'll get enough good intel to finish off the terrs quickly and get home before the worst-case dates that drive planning.


Originally Posted by Polaris:
The US could take any one, maybe two, of these 'peasant armies'... trying to attack too many more--while having to defend the US from the real threat that the US might be the real military target of Dr. Destroyer, or that VIPER or others may take advantage of the US being off fighting Dr. Destroyer cronie armies--would be outside of the capability of the US military for some time.

If the US Military were fool enough to concentrate on the peasant armies, that might be true. But they wouldn't. In your scenario, Destroyer himself is the true threat, and it is against him any real thrust would be directed.


Originally Posted by Polaris:
Access to natural resources has long been determined by political and military means.

Control of governments has long been determined by political and military means. When those governments are in power, they either follow economic laws, or eventually implode on their own, without any need for external military action, usually wrecking the nation's economy in the process.


Originally Posted by Polaris:
This would seem to make Dr. Destroyer's plan more workable. If the US would not go to war over Dr. Destroyer raising the prices on these commodities, even if Dr. Destroyer has a monopoly and could therefore threaten the economic health of the US economy, then he would not need to worry so much about the military balance or calculations.

War would be fought with Destroyer, it would just have approximately zero to do with the price of diamonds, and everything to do with the man's previous actions.


Originally Posted by Polaris:
Yes, it is sad... and if it was not so tragic that such wars happen, it would also be 'laughable'. However, we have fought wars over the price of oil. Was that laughable? We have fought wars over the price of industrial diamonds. Was that laughable? Governments (even our own) have fought wars over things that probably shouldn't have justified a war.

While there are those, arguing both for and against wars, who like to grossly oversimplify the actual reasons behind them, I don't think it can be truly said that any modern war was fought, in large measure, over the price of any commodity. Those started by democracies are typically fought to take dangerous men out of power, before they become even more dangerous, more powerful, and more of a threat. And the dangers these men represent are not generally economic in nature, but military. The memory of capitulation at the Rhineland, the Saar, and the Sudetenland, and the price paid for it, drives a lot of the thinking behind war in the West today.


Originally Posted by Polaris:
I would suggest that the people of many of the lesser developed world live in conditions no better, and often worse, than the Mississippi field hands you refer to.

I have no doubt that there are many in Third World lands living in truly appalling conditions. Most such unfortunates live in lands torn by war and rebellion. In more peaceful times, they may, it is true, be poor. But there is still a serious difference between someone who is as poor as a slave, and someone who is a slave. And in any case it is not "the people" Destroyer is dealing with, it is their rulers - unless you mean to have him leading popular rebellions.


Originally Posted by me and Polaris:
And the fact that many of these peoples won't put up with "strong leadership" from outsiders, even ones of the same skin color, is the cause of much of the trouble in many of these nations today.

[I am unsure what you mean by this section. Perhaps more explanation if you have a few moments... I would suggest that many people will follow leaders that can deliver a better life for them].

What I mean is, pardon my language, these people don't take crap from anyone. To me, this is, in general, an admirable trait. But it does fuel a lot of the violence that plagues the Third World today (and not just the Third World - see Ireland). And if they won't take it from their neighbors, why should they take it from a megalomaniacal white imperialist like Destroyer? Because he will kill them otherwise? That I could see, sometimes - but Third Worlders have their pride, too, and are no more cowardly than anyone else. Because he is sweet-talking them? I can hardly see this of either Destroyer or the Third Worlders. Because they're living better? Rating matters of pocketbook higher than matters of pride and honor is a thing for the decadent West, not proud emerging civilizations - if they were willing to do this, many of them would probably have been living better already without Destroyer's arrival.


Originally Posted by Polaris:
If Rwanda was part of the new world order, and intervening would threaten massive retaliation against US cities, I could about guarantee they'd NOT intervene. The US didn't want to intervene when doing so was fighting some of those 'peasants' you referred to earlier, why would we intervene if we were confronted with a truly deterring threat? I'm afraid I don't understand this one either...

Again, if Destroyer can really retaliate massively against First World nations, why does he need Third World puppets? And the US didn't intervene before because there was nothing and no one they cared about there. If Destroyer (or, in the real world, Osama Bin Laden) were to turn up in the middle of an otherwise identical massacre today, I can about assure you the US would be there in some fashion or other.


Originally Posted by Polaris:
I respect your opinion on that. Dr. Destroyer is a student of power, and brilliant beyond much comparison. He rarely likes to soil himself with the menial use of fighting to get what he wants. He is far more prone to use his mind than direct force to accomplish his desire of conquest (which is one of the things that makes him such a big threat). See page 9 of the CKC book for what I mean. A man of that brilliance would likely know that conquering the world, and then trying to hold it, would be a fool's game.

It would be a fool's game for lesser mortals. The intellect and will of Destroyer are not bound by such petty limitations! The Earth and its dimension are but the first step - if a slow-witted and tender-hearted alien such as Istvatha V'han can forge an interdimensional empire, what is to stop one with the matchless cunning and ruthless will of Destroyer from bettering it?


Originally Posted by Polaris:
The people have already grown accustomed to being oppressed by dictatorships--a well trained population would be a good target for Destroyer.

This is in large measure true, with one caveat - a proud nationalism often fires the hearts of Third World peoples, and oppressions they might accept from a fellow-countryman trying to make his land a regional or world power, could be viewed quite differently when coming at the hand of a foreign ruler. This would indeed be one reason for Destroyer to work with local puppets, but the big question is, would his ego acknowledge this? I have my doubts.


Originally Posted by Polaris:
These nations have an enormous untapped power source (natural resources) that the US and others are highly dependent upon.

"Dependence" on natural resources is always a temporary state of affairs. The minute the resource becomes too scarce or expensive, alternatives become profitable, and people with an eye for those profits will be there ready to rake in the money. Short-term "supply shocks" are the most that can really be accomplished by manipulating the supplies of a given resource; these can cause chaos and political changes, and bring in some cash for those controlling the supply, but they'll hardly lead to mastery of the world.

By the way, a lot of my real objections, as I have noted, have to do with Destroyer and his egomania. Jeff's idea of replacing him with the Warlord has a lot of merit to me, in that respect. The Warlord seems a soldier at heart - I suspect he'd be happy as the chief conquering general of a world-ruler, not needing to take the trappings of leadership or the burdens of administering conquered teritory himself. The Warlord has also killed a lot of superheroes, but presumably much of his killing was done as a "legitimate" mercenary, in the service of recognized (if disliked) rulers, or even arguably in self-defense, protecting at least quasi-legal arms transfers (his business, after all) with unpopular international leaders.


Originally Posted by Polaris:
How about this, as the story goes on: The heroes, wanting to stop Dr. Destroyer move to try to "liberate" the people from the oppression of Dr. Destroyer. As they do so, they find a people that do not want "liberation". Their lives are being improved.

A lot of Germans didn't particularly care to be "liberated" from Hitler, especially by the Soviets. Many of their lives were a lot better under him than they were under Weimar fecklessness, the Depression, hyperinflation, and reparations to France and England. The view of many was that he was leading them to a truly independent destiny so glorious that jealous capitalist and communist alike ganged up on Germany to prevent it. But Hitler was not attacked for what he was doing to Germans, he was attacked for what he was doing to foreigners. The Germans got their "liberation" anyway, whether it improved or worsened their lives.

[Lupus]

I'm not going to jump in on the discussion above... except for a couple of bits. :)

For Destroyer's ability to wage war: it could be said that he's been getting ready for war with the world ever since Destruga. After all, he never intended to win the battle of Detroit - only to fake his death convincingly. So he's had nearly twenty years to refine his process. I can see that he'd have boosted his stockpiles of gear and improved it considerably, for the purposes of standing up to whatever he plans on doing. (Frankly, any plan that takes Destroyer that long to prepare for is going to be super-scary.) If his plan is to take on the world's conventional forces, then his stuff would be different than in the books. Scott makes a good point about the TOW missile. Therefore, the Black Talons would probably be redesigned to include an automatic missile deflection. Prolly joined by various artillery pieces that would target missile-wielding troops (TOWs take time to set up, yah?). That’s an example, anyway. Black Talons in my own world are re-designed to have two crewmembers (shamelessly ripped off from Wildstorm).

Now, as for the military... the US military in particular is incredibly powerful and flexible, but it’s a beast to run. It requires all kinds of support, co-ordination, and generally relies on having superior technology and training as compared to its opposition. At least, it has post-WWII. A lot of military practice would have to be revised. Destroyer, being on the smart side of average, would know he’d have to target smart. Don’t try to fight the entire military machine. Just make sure enough spanners are thrown in the works. Begin by claiming the real high ground - space. As soon as hostilities begin, blow away all spy satellites, destroy NASA’s space station, and target Gateway in the event that it has any military activity (including surveillance). Then start firing lasers and dropping nails on aircraft carriers. Take out carriers, take out surveillance overflights, take out satellites. :) An intelligence-blind and air-power-denied US army is a very different beast. Not impotent, for sure. It’s still the scariest beast out there. But without eyes and ears, its strategic operations are limited, even though tactically it’ll still kick anyone’s arses. The aim here could be simply to delay any actual invasion - make people think twice about invasion. Give D time to see what’s going on and refine his plans.

Of course, in CU, you also have UNTIL and other supertech organisations. These make things even more complicated, as they have tech countermeasures of their own. Not to mention VIPER. And Menton.

Also, never forget human intelligence. And sabotage. Allied troops may be too numerous to handle... so find out where landings are taking place, and nuke them. Give Rakshasa enough time and he could probably have assassins stalking just about every important member of hostile foreign governments. ‘Cease your aggression or all your leaders die.’ After all, in times of war, military command is a legitimate target. That was demonstrated IRL recently.

Now, it doesn’t have to go this way. ;) There’s a lot of room in here for superheroes to have actions of their own. Such as destroying battlesats, for space-capable teams. Got an underwater guy? Well, Dr D’s got subs that are invisible to sonar and are causing havoc with naval power. He also has rebel Atlanteans causing a ruckus down there, to keep them occupied. PCs can go solve that problem, and suddenly Atlanteans are busy destroying D’s submarines. Mucho opportunity for PC involvement. Oh, as for the ‘stop or your leaders die’ plot... in addition to VIPER and Eurostar becoming involved, perhaps Menton offers to unmask all the assassins. But perhaps Rakshasa’s placed dummies for him to find. But this can quickly get silly as you devolve into triple-bluff.

It’s a very big storyline. Would include a great deal of complexity. But D has proven himself to be pretty durn good at anticipation and deception. Just look at the whole battle of Detroit. 50,000+ dead, as a diversion. That’s kinda... nuts. Inspired nuts, though.

[Lupus]

Apologies if anyone gets spammed by my post twice. It didn't appear to go through the first time. :/

I do appear to have managed to delete it, howerver. Yay me.

[Dauntless]

Here's the thing I wonder about DD. His time is running short. If he's going to croak fairly soon (I imagine even with his anagathics he has at most 20 years to live at the max), he's not only hampered by arrogance, but by impatience and haste as well. He needs to come up with a plan that conquers the world, and conquers it quickly.

I'm not sure the "UN Legitimization" scheme will work, as it will take time to both sway over many of these 3rd world countries, and elevate them to a power that can match the non-joining members. And I agree with Scott Destroyer's comments....I think some 3rd world nations will ally with DD, but his expanding sphere of influence will also cause some 3rd world nations to flock to the other world powers. DD isn't going to get all the dispossesed nations of the world.

But more importantly, what good is it to finally conquer the world if DD croaks over the next day? If anything, DD should be experiencing something like what Annihilus in the Marvel universe did....a being of vast power who's about to die. I also have a hunch that due to his megalomania, he has a feeling that without his leadership, human beings aren't worthy enough to live. So he could possibly change from world conqueror to world destroyer.

What this master plain is, I don't know, but since he's already wasted 10 years of his life on it, I have a hunch it's a grandiose plan designed to conquer the Earth as quickly as possible. It doesn't fit his personality to be a patient schemer biding his time. Again, I think this plan fits Menton or Teleios better than DD. Menton all the more since he could easily manipulate political leaders into doing his bidding very subtly or even peripherally (maybe Menton won't directly mentally manipulate world leaders...but their cabinet, advisors, staff, etc who in turn have the leader's ears). Menton could also cause entire populations to change allegiances especially if he convinces with just a grain of truth. This is Menton's style and tactic. DD is the kind who'll just blow you up if you don't agree. His genius seems to lie in technical creation, not in manipulation, patience and strategy. I have a feeling he'd scoff at Sun Tzu, Clausewitz or even Machiavelli. His arrogance and I would imagine his growing impatience are much more limiting to his overall strength than it would seem.

[Polaris]

Well put, Lupus.

Scott: There was a study done back in the early 1990s (I have been trying to find the precise citation) that drew a link between warfare and economics. In short, the research studies wars that had 'clearly defined' purposes (religion, politics, etc). What it found is that war is nearly always about economics. However, I can see that that is something we will just have to disagree about.

Who would win a war between the US and Dr. Destroyer? Good question... I would suspect that both Dr. D and the US would do their best to avoid finding out. The weapons Dr. Destroyer has ammassed would be far more capable of deterring the US from wanting a war. If the US goes after him, he has, among other things, the ability to create robot duplicates of himself (Send it to DC and take out the Congress, White House and Supreme Court... see if the heroes can get there in time... if they do, teleport to New York and blast there... if they show up there, go someplace else), or just use his orbital facitility "hidden by advanced stealth technology and equipped with weaponry even more powerful than the cannon with which he razed Detroit".

What would make you think the US would be in the least bit interested in ever fighting a war against this?

You mentioned that the US would just target Dr. Destroyer--how do you find him? If you are lucky enough to find him, is it him or is it a duplicate? If it is him, what stops him from simply teleporting away?

We haven't been able to get bin Laden, and we knew where he was. We haven't been able to get Saddam, and we have 148,000 troops (including our most advanced), trying to get him. I would suggest that Dr. Destroyer would be far more difficult to kill than these two individuals have been.

LOL... I am getting the feeling that this discussion has moved more into a thread fitting the non-roleplaying section.

We will have to agree to disagree whether rulers of the third world are willing to be junior partners in their rule. The US has made a policy for decades now of buying the loyalty of these "puppet states". If a leader disappoints us enough, a new leader is found. It has worked, and I suspect that it will continue to work well into the future (whether we are the ones doing it, or others are). The US has earned the nickname at the United Nations of "New Rome". Former US Ambassador to the UN Stevenson, when confronted with evidence that a number of nation-states were led by CIA employees, he replied that the US should run those countries.

I am not very familiar with Warlord... I chose Dr. Destroyer because of his vast resources, his reputation, the fact that Eurostar and Viper might be willing to work with the heroes, the heroes might be tempted to work with them, and that there would be an assumption by the heroes that Dr. Destroyer's New World Order would need to be stopped (without immediately thinking that people will be made better off under the Doctor's rule). That is the reason for choosing Dr. Destroyer.

Given that one of your objections to this plot was that leaders of the LDCs would not surrender any power to Dr. Destroyer, why do you believe they would under Warlord? I am not sure why one would be acceptable and the other objectionable.

Polaris

[Polaris]

Dauntless,

It could be that he has been working on this for the past 10 years, and the reason that some join immediately is that they have already agreed to work with him.

I am unsure why you believe it does not fit him to be a patient planner/schemer. He worked for the Americans long enough to learn what he needed to learn about American military technology, then left. He spent the next 25 years building a criminal network and building technology. Realizing he needed money, he established several dummy corporations and used the technology he developed to begin building up a cash reserve. It wasn't until the mid-1970s that Destroyer felt prepared to begin his effort to conquer the world.

It seems to me that he realized in 1938 that only he was fit to rule over all humankind... that he knew at that young age that he was going to rule the world. To work on developing his sciences, resources, etc until the mid 1970s, and then to strike, would indicate someone that is a bit of a patient planner. It also would seem that what he has been doing for the past 10 years would seem to be a patient planner (although I could be wrong on this second one).

Polaris

[Dauntless]

I think he's growing impatient though because of his age. He knows that even if he could extend his life past 100, the quality of his life will be worse and worse, even with his high technology. Time is his greatest enemy. So he may have realized he needed to gather his forces and build his strength in the beginning, but I wonder how patient he will be now?

Granted, he has been sitting idle for 10 years which indicates a measure of patience. But this has ticked off 10 years of his life. And at 85, he knows time is running out. Conquering the world isn't a game in that you win as long as you have more points at the end of the buzzer. In DD's case, when the buzzer goes off, he's dead...or at least so old that he can't effectively enjoy it. And I wonder how long until senility creeps in? For a man of his intellect (and arrogance) that must be a nightmare to him. So it's not enough to "win" by conquering the world...he has to have time to revel in it and enjoy it. That's why I think his master plan is a "one fell swoop" grandiose plan rather than a more subtle divide and conquer/join forces and assimilate approach.

Hopefully Steve won't kill me for directly quoting from CKC (but it is only a sentence): "He's not content to sit quietly and conspire behind the scenes to take over the world; he wants to bring humanity to its knees with one terrifying gesture that embodies his irresistible power and intelligence"

I think a plan of having dispossesed or disenfranchised nations joing him a sign of weakness...that DD couldn't somehow conquer the world on his own. However, he might do something as you suggested as a decoy. A feint to grab the world's attention and divert it's resources away from his true Master plan. This I could see DD doing...but this plan as a means and end unto itself does not fit his character. As CKC says, DD loves multi-layer plans, and also making people question their "petty" ideas of ethics and morality. I could see DD improving the lot of people's lives at least temporarily...so as to make Heroes and world governments question if it's "morally vindicated" to depose him even though he's improving the quality of life for others. But DD is also evil personified...third only perhaps to Takofanes and Dark Seraph in terms of his malice and cruel intentions. If he did improve the lot of people, it would be only to make people worship him as a God, since that's how he sees himself.

[assault]

Originally posted by Dauntless
However, he might do something as you suggested as a decoy. A feint to grab the world's attention and divert it's resources away from his true Master plan. This I could see DD doing...but this plan as a means and end unto itself does not fit his character. As CKC says, DD loves multi-layer plans, and also making people question their "petty" ideas of ethics and morality. I could see DD improving the lot of people's lives at least temporarily...so as to make Heroes and world governments question if it's "morally vindicated" to depose him even though he's improving the quality of life for others. But DD is also evil personified...third only perhaps to Takofanes and Dark Seraph in terms of his malice and cruel intentions. If he did improve the lot of people, it would be only to make people worship him as a God, since that's how he sees himself.

Well said.

The Master Plan will always be more subtle than what is on the surface. This, incidentally, ensures that petty objections as to the impossibility/unlikeliness of the Master Plan are irrelevent. :)

Third World leaders won't play along? Replace them with robots! Rogue supers will try to kill you? Replace _yourself_ with robots! Gee, robots can solve a lot of problems, can't they? Maybe Mechanon has a point...

Of course DD will treat his subjects well - that's part of a god's duties. The wrath and smiting is another part.

Alan

[Scott Destroyer]

Hello again,


Originally Posted by Polaris:
There was a study done back in the early 1990s (I have been trying to find the precise citation) that drew a link between warfare and economics. In short, the research studies wars that had 'clearly defined' purposes (religion, politics, etc). What it found is that war is nearly always about economics. However, I can see that that is something we will just have to disagree about.

Well, some linkage between warfare and resource acquisition is hardly a surprise. Clausewitz himself stated that war is the continuation of politics by other means, and politicians have meddled in economies for about as long as there have been politicians. But I'm far from alone in suspecting that the less quantifiable psychological considerations play a much larger part that they are commonly given credit for, especially by rationally-inclined scientists of the sort who produce research studies. No better relatively-recent example of this than the Falklands War - expenditure on both sides far in excess of anything the islands could possibly bring to either for many, many a year. Even the farthest fringe of conspiracy-theorists have had a tough time trying to conjure up materialistic rationales for that one, weak mutterings about potential North Sea-like oil fields around the Falklands being about the best they can come up with.


Originally Posted by Polaris:
What would make you think the US would be in the least bit interested in ever fighting a war against this?

The eternal dilemma - given his philosophies and goals, conflict with Destroyer is inevitable. You can fight it now, or fight it later. If fighting it now were to Destroyer's advantage, you'd be fighting it now, because he'd be attacking you. Therefore, striking as soon as possible, as hard as possible, is at the least an option to be deeply considered. You almost always have a better chance in a fight if you get in a good first shot. You could outwait the communists - they thought all they had to do was survive, and "inevitable historical forces" would drop victory into their lap. Destroyer is unlikely to harbor such delusions. If you don't have technology on your side, and you can't match Destroyer's tactical brilliance, the war of attrition is your last real option, and such attrition is best started as soon as possible. For all his technology, can Destroyer really match the industrial output and human resources of the last world superpower and any allies it can muster (and, again, if he can, why is he bothering with the Third World and diplomacy)? If he upgrades his systems, he may kill 5, 10, 20 tanks for every Black Talon you take out. But can he afford to lose that one Black Talon as much as you can afford to lose the twenty tanks? The US Military is well versed in this sort of strategy. It's how they beat the Confederacy, it's how they and the Russians beat Hitler. It's bloody and costly, but I have little doubt they'd resort to it again if they thought it their only hope of victory. As for Destroyer's weapons of mass destruction - well, he's not the only one on the block with them, either. The US has used them before, on an enemy already on the ropes, an enemy with inferior technology who apparently presented far less of a real threat at that point than Destroyer with his shiny high-tech toys. Even if Destroyer can supposedly protect himself to some degree, how many of his new-found allies will stay at his side with stakes like those pushed onto the table?


Originally Posted by Polaris:
You mentioned that the US would just target Dr. Destroyer--how do you find him? If you are lucky enough to find him, is it him or is it a duplicate? If it is him, what stops him from simply teleporting away?

We haven't been able to get bin Laden, and we knew where he was. We haven't been able to get Saddam, and we have 148,000 troops (including our most advanced), trying to get him. I would suggest that Dr. Destroyer would be far more difficult to kill than these two individuals have been.

Hussein and bin Laden are not confirmed to be dead. But neither, personally, is likely to be showing his face in public, or ordering up wars, heavy weapons, or major terrorist operations. You don't have to find a ruler to cut his links to his forces in the field, which are not so easily hidden. If Destroyer can be put in a similar position, it will probably suffice for the purposes of those opposed to him. It would, of course be better to have his threat removed once and for all, but if he does escape back into hiding - well, he wasn't doing much to anyone for the last ten years he was hidden, was he?

Robot duplicates can be a two-edged sword. It shouldn't be too hard for anyone to build a robot that looks like Doctor Destroyer. If you have conditioned subordinates to obey robots that look like you, how much havoc could be caused by an enemy capable of building such robots? If such robots incinerated anyone with the effrontery to question the will of Destroyer by asking for a password or other identity confirmation, would this harm or help their subterfuge? :D

Besides, Hussein and bin Laden seem much more practical and subtle than Destroyer. They are well aware that there are forces in the world more powerful than they. I'm not so sure the same can be said of Destroyer. And they don't have the personal hatred of the world's most powerful psionic. ;)


Originally Posted by Polaris:
If a leader disappoints us enough, a new leader is found. It has worked, and I suspect that it will continue to work well into the future (whether we are the ones doing it, or others are).

Again, this I could probably see Destroyer doing. Finding new leaders, and setting them up in positions explicitly subordinate to his own, the way Gigaton and Rakshasa are explicitly subordinate to him. He might even intimidate existing leaders into accepting such positions. But this explicit subordination to the world's most dangerous criminal would seem to throw away any of the diplomatic benefits you are apparently looking for with this UN thing. And it could conceivably even increase his odds of being attacked - "Let's see, we'd have been happy to attack Destroyer before to pay back the harm he's already caused us, and keep him from doing worse in the future. Now, we can pay him back AND have an excuse to install friendly governments in Third World nations filled with natural resources we need - those with the taint of collaboration with Destroyer must be removed, after all. And if we don't attack him now, we give him time to exploit the resources of all these nations, which will better his position against us even further."


Originally Posted by Polaris:
I am not very familiar with Warlord... I chose Dr. Destroyer because of his vast resources, his reputation, the fact that Eurostar and Viper might be willing to work with the heroes, the heroes might be tempted to work with them, and that there would be an assumption by the heroes that Dr. Destroyer's New World Order would need to be stopped (without immediately thinking that people will be made better off under the Doctor's rule). That is the reason for choosing Dr. Destroyer.

Well, don't worry, you're not alone here, because as far as I know, Warlord made his debut in the current Champions Universe, and was not in previous editions (though my own knowledge of 4th is admittedly scanty). He seems to take the general campaign role of the old Professor Muerte - a character similar to Destroyer, but powered down enough that a party still under starting Active Point or Damage Class limitations has a chance to take him. And he's been given a background and personality seemingly calculated to endear him to old wargamers like myself. :) You do certainly have a point about Destroyer having a lot of enemies - Gravitar has supposedly talked some smurf about him, too, Firewing might relish a few rounds with the "top of the Omega list", and money talks with a mercenary like the Warlord. Powerful potential allies all!


Originally Posted by Polaris:
Given that one of your objections to this plot was that leaders of the LDCs would not surrender any power to Dr. Destroyer, why do you believe they would under Warlord? I am not sure why one would be acceptable and the other objectionable.

From my reading of him, Warlord wants to be a world-conqueror, and cares much less about being a world-ruler. He wants to go down in history next to Alexander, Genghis Khan, and Napoleon. I could see him making actual deals with people, settling for total command of a coalition of Third World militaries (stiffened by his own elite troopers), and leaving real power over domestic and economic affairs (beyond what is necessary to support his armies) in the hands of current rulers, including the real power base of a domestic secret police. And I could see many of these rulers accepting such deals, as their own power would grow when the Warlord turned conquered areas over to them for administration while he moved on to the next conquest. Destroyer seems the sort to take all power for himself, the sort to be reluctant to leave his "partners" even the appearance of any actual decision-making authority.

On the downside, Warlord is far less powerful than Destroyer, and a far newer player in the world-threatening super-villain game. This, though, is all the more reason for him to cut real deals with current leaders.

I can also tell you what my response would be were I a player in your campaign who was faced with the offer of working with VIPER, EUROSTAR, or other villains against Destroyer: I'd take the offer in a heartbeat. An altruistic character would see it as a chance to give villains an opportunity at redemption, while if I were playing a more cynical type, I'd hold the view that, if people have to die fighting Destroyer, at many of them as possible should be lowlife scum like VIPER goons or Fiacho and his cronies. I would, of course, always have an eye open for potential treachery from such "allies". I suspect, from my responses, that you'd have guessed I'd take this stance, though. :)

Polaris, I do hope this discussion is helping you with your ideas. I'm making a lot of assumptions about conditions that haven't really been explicitly stated (you're using current-timeline CU; Destroyer is as pompous and as arrogant as in CKC, or even more so; US and world political leadership in your campaign at least roughly corresponding to those in the real world, campaign moral tone tending towards "shades of gray", and so forth). At the least, I hope I'm helping you get your thoughts tuned up to drop this concept into a campaign with a maximum of plausibility and a good fit into your play style. At any rate, it's been a fun discussion from this end, so far! And good luck with the campaign, no matter which decisions you wind up making! :)

[Polaris]

Thank you Scott, and everyone else, for your very insightful and interesting comments.

I hope this discussion thread has not veered too far off of what would belong in the Champions section (although much of it is 'non-gaming', it would seem to have at least some relevance to a gaming discussion).

I do not know much about Warlord, so I could not really comment on whether he would be a better choice. I think that if he is more interested in conquering (ala Alexander or Napoleon), then I don't know that he would be as interested in this form of power grab. This scheme is really geared toward a notion that if anyone could organize the LDCs, then they could grab enormous power (according to the Dependency Theory of Power, they could actually seize enough power to take over the world).

The point of the scheme, of course, is to test the PCs. I was very interested that some posters expressed the view that it would not be the hero thing to do to stop Destroyer if the lot of the people he ruled was better off. Another poster expressed the idea that Viper and Eurostar are NOT lesser evils than Dr. Destroyer, while another said Destroyer was evil itself (second, possibly, to only two other individuals, neither of which is Viper or Eurostar).

Stories that lead to this type of thinking and consideration are the most fun for me as a GM. What is the 'right' thing to do is not always perfectly clear (I am not fond of the games that limit thinking to "which power should I use to blast my opponent").

I did run this game.. the results were interesting:

1. The team leader, an arrogant anti-hero was team leader largely because of his experience as a superhero and with the team, agreed to meet with Eurostar, but then backed out of the meeting and refused to so much as speak to them about joining forces.

2. One character, an innocent female hero with aspirations of always 'fighting for all that is good', took a leave from the team to JOIN EUROSTAR in the fight against Dr. Destroyer (she really did not like following the team leader, and his refusal to at least see what Eurostar had to say really peeved her off).

3. One character, an interdimensional traveller who did not have any strong allegiance to any particular nation, but believed in fighting for people that were unable to fight for themselves, ended up JOINING DESTROYER! Without going into complete detail about how this all came about (it would be quite a long story), basically she is played by a very good role player that does not let her personal knowlege of the world affect her character. She went out to learn about the lives of the people in these new world order countries, and found them to be improving (albeit slowly), and decided that the more just and good cause was to help these people, regardless of her teammates talk about how 'evil' Destroyer is. Obviously, she left the team.

4. One character, an Irishman imbued by the spirits of the old druids of Ireland to protect the Emerald Isle from the one known as 'Destroyer', obviously sought to fight against the threat from Destroyer. He began to work with number 5 below in that fight, but eventually stopped showing up to games (he hated that ANYONE could agree to work with either Eurostar/Viper OR Destroyer, and continued to lobby me as GM to "make them stop").

5. Finally, our 'Superman' character. At first, he tried to compel people to stand up to Destroyer, then realizing that that would not work, developed a plan to seemingly accept Destroyer's plan, and then turn on him in the end.

If anyone else has any similar campaign ideas (does not have to be overly grandiose, just something that challenges the players to have their characters make basic choices about what they believe, and what they are willing to do to fight for what they believe), I would love to hear about them...:):):)

Thanks again everyone! :):)

Polaris

[Kristopher]

I was going to start commenting, and then realized that it wouldn't be so much on your premise as it would be on the underlying assumptions in comics that allow such a premise to be plausible in many comics universes.

Let's just say that I don't like supers laughing at tanks and tac-nukes. The idea that DD and 20,000 troops could defend a vast swath of the third world from NATO is, in my mind, laughable. The idea that one man and his terrorist organization could have any kind of technological edge over the western powers is, in my opinion, laughable.

[OddHat]

Originally posted by Kristopher
I was going to start commenting, and then realized that it wouldn't be so much on your premise as it would be on the underlying assumptions in comics that allow such a premise to be plausible in many comics universes.

Let's just say that I don't like supers laughing at tanks and tac-nukes. The idea that DD and 20,000 troops could defend a vast swath of the third world from NATO is, in my mind, laughable. The idea that one man and his terrorist organization could have any kind of technological edge over the western powers is, in my opinion, laughable.

As is the idea that you could have a huge group of fanatically loyal terrorists without any sort of guiding ideology.

On the other hand, these are comic books.

[Broblawsky]

>As is the idea that you could have a huge group of >fanatically loyal terrorists without any sort of guiding >ideology.

Actually, I always assumed that Destroyer used the same mind-control techniques that subverted Gigaton (and failed to work on Menton and Mentalla) to maintain control of his troops. That particular weapon is, in fact, probably Destroyer's most powerful of all the technologies we know he has to date - a subtle, highly effective brainwashing technique could be used to maintain control of any populations Destroyer was able to conquer, which would render an organized resistance impossible. I suspect that whatever Destroyer's ultimate plan is, it probably makes use of that technology.

[Andrew_A]

What if Dr.D made a secret deal with the US and the other world powers? What if he offered to take out some of the other global threats in exchange for non-interferrence?

Takofanes, Mechanon, Menton, and Ist'vatha Vhan are, in their own ways, more dangerous than Destroyer could ever hope to be.

Takofanes and Menton, for example, want to wipe out humanity. Dr.D may be evil, but he doesn't want to kill everyone. Likewise Menton is a definite threat because of his powers and Ist'vatha has resources that make the US's seem puny.

If Destroyer struck deals with his enemies he could buy himself some time

[Agent X]

Given the right technology, Dr. Destroyer could defend his territorial claims against conventional forces. If his 20,000 followers are outfitted well enough that a five-man team can take 2-3 supers...

[Kristopher]

Originally posted by Agent X
Given the right technology, Dr. Destroyer could defend his territorial claims against conventional forces. If his 20,000 followers are outfitted well enough that a five-man team can take 2-3 supers...

Which should be, IMO, a lot easier than taking on 1-1 Cav, 1st Armor.

[OddHat]

Originally posted by Kristopher
Which should be, IMO, a lot easier than taking on 1-1 Cav, 1st Armor.

Especially since most Champions supers have a code against killing, where as the US armed forces do not. ;)

[Polaris]

It would not only be the 20,000 super-troops that would be fighting... the western powers would also have to contend with the armies of SEVERAL countries (potentially simultaneously), weapon systems that could threaten entire cities (his orbital base has weapons 'more powerful' than the one used to hit Detroit). The ability to make duplicates of himself to send in cause problems, then teleport back to base.

I can not see how one would think that this idea is 'laughable'. I do not believe the US would act militarily (and risk massive retaliation)... like most nations, the US is not interested in fighting wars that would so devastate its own nation. There is a big reason that North Korea's WMD program (which has now developed nuclear weapons technology, they have declared themselves quite willing to use the weapons, tested a missile that the US government believes could threaten American territory, and told US diplomats that they intend on selling the weapons technology... how much bigger of a threat is that than Iraq, who had a GDP 20% less than the state of Idaho, inspectors going through their country, surveillance flights over, etc?). The US does not want a fight with a foe that can do real harm to the US (who would want to fight someone that could hit really hard).

How well would the US military do when confronted with such a massive amount of less trained, less equipped troops... supported by 20,000 super troops... with robotic equivalents of Dr. Destroyer (the most powerful super villain on earth), and a massive weapon able to come crashing down on them from the stars? How well would the US military do when the enemy can match or exceed them in technology? How well would the US do when the enemy is quite a bit smarter (Dr. Destroyer is described as an exceptional genius... a description I certainly have not heard about Bush or General Meyers)? I don't know... it is hard to tell because this is a condition the US military has not faced during the career of anyone presently in the US military.

However, that would not be what this story is about...

It is important to realize that this is a comic book story... many threats handled by the Avengers could be handled by the government. It's handled by the superheroes because that is what the genre is about. If the Avengers just stayed home and let the government confront the threat, then... well... it wouldn't be much of a comic book. The Avengers are the folks that the US government turns to to handle many such threats. The PCs are the superheroes of this story, and they are the ones the US government would turn to try to stop Destroyer, without having US cities get wiped out in the process.

Given such a tough task, would they be willing to accept an offer to work with Eurostar and Viper (are stakes, millions of lives, in particular, worth working with known enemies).

Polaris

[Beast]

OUCH !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I broke my doze

(Clown installed locked the unbeliuvium automatic doors the rest of the of the building is normal)

I can't believe nobody saw this

[assault]

Originally posted by Kristopher
Let's just say that I don't like supers laughing at tanks and tac-nukes. The idea that DD and 20,000 troops could defend a vast swath of the third world from NATO is, in my mind, laughable. The idea that one man and his terrorist organization could have any kind of technological edge over the western powers is, in my opinion, laughable.

Yes, and it's pretty absurd that people can leap tall buildings at a single bound, too.

You can play plenty of other genres with the Hero System, if superheroes aren't to your taste...

Alan

[ChuckB]

I don't think Dr. D would sashay into the U.N. , he's a war-criminal twice over (he still has nazi war-crimes to answer to remember ?).

[Jinx999]

In the real world the US army has the best fighting technology in the world. If someone turned up with superior technology they are not going to sit around. Even if you are completely cynical about it, think about big research projects, new factories and all the rest of the congressinal pork.
So - how does this play out. Let's say your PC's want a favour from the US government (say permission to build a base). In return they want you to capture a Black Talon intact to reverse engineer it. The possible complications, even if they succeed are endless.

[Broblawsky]

Once again, Polaris, I have to note: if Dr. Destroyer could actually deter the major military powers of the world, then he damn well doesn't need to raise the price of industrial diamonds in order to conquer mankind.

[Kristopher]

Originally posted by Polaris
It would not only be the 20,000 super-troops that would be fighting... the western powers would also have to contend with the armies of SEVERAL countries (potentially simultaneously),

Part of the original premise at the start of this thread is that Dr D's offer is to third-world nations. If Iraq didn't stand a chance against the US back in 1991, when it (Iraq) had the 4th largest army in the world and access to fairly recent Soviet weapons, what makes you think that the combined armies of a score of third-world countries armed with 40-yr-old rifles and a bag of mixed nuts would be more than flies before the cyclone?

The only forces of consequence arrayed against the US in that fight would be the 20,000 troops that Dr D brought along. And don't think for a second that the western powers won't have troops every bit as well-trained and well-equiped as anything that Dr D can field. The notion that one man and his private organization can out-do modern developed states is a joke. If Dr D has 1 company of power-armored special forces, the western nations will field 20 companies against them. If Dr D can find half a dozen super-mercs for this army, the western powers will use money, patriotism, whatever, to recruit, train, and field dozens. If Dr D has the best main battle tanks in the world, the US, Britain, and Germany will have three different better-than-best models of tank that outclass it on the battlefield.

[Kristopher]

Originally posted by assault
Yes, and it's pretty absurd that people can leap tall buildings at a single bound, too.

You can play plenty of other genres with the Hero System, if superheroes aren't to your taste...

Alan

Ah yes, another person who thinks that once you accept one fantastic premise in creating your setting, you have to accept them all.

A solid worldbuilding process actually goes something like this: once you assume the fantastic element of super-powers, from there proceed in a logical manner to develop the rest of the world.

The typical comic book setting is different in dozens of ways from the real world, and most of those differences have nothing to do with -- and no bearing -- on the presence of super-powers. The people don't act like real people. The governments don't act like real governments. Never mind the inconsistencies and contradictions that build up like plaque in the setting's arteries.

[Broblawsky]

And don't think for a second that the western powers won't have troops every bit as well-trained and well-equiped as anything that Dr D can field. The notion that one man and his private organization can out-do modern developed states is a joke. If Dr D has 1 company of power-armored special forces, the western nations will field 20 companies against them. If Dr D can find half a dozen super-mercs for this army, the western powers will use money, patriotism, whatever, to recruit, train, and field dozens. If Dr D has the best main battle tanks in the world, the US, Britain, and Germany will have three different better-than-best models of tank that outclass it on the battlefield.

I gotta disagree with you there. Dr D has, pretty much flat-out, the overall most advanced technology on Earth. Teleios has better biotech and Mechanon has better robotics, but Destroyer is more advanced in all other field than either of them - in a straight-out fight between Destroyer's armies and our armies it would basically be a match of quantity vs quality - the problem is, the difference in firepower between an M-1 Abrams and a Black Talon (even upgraded) is not so great as to make up for the difference of numbers. Also remember that Destroyer's forces, for all their power, could still be taken by, say, tac-nukes - which, given Destroyer's history, would probably be acceptable.

I would say this tactic is, in fact, more likely to be used by Istvatha V'Han than Destroyer. V'Han wouldn't care that much about the individual countries; the difference is, getting a beach-head on Earth for a coupla months would let V'Han summon perhaps millions of D-Soldiers and various spacecraft and armor units - something which could easily overwhelm mankind.

[assault]

Originally posted by Kristopher
The only forces of consequence arrayed against the US in that fight would be the 20,000 troops that Dr D brought along.

You can't be paying attention to the news at the moment.

Half the US military is sitting around in Iraq surrounded by people who hate them and are at least sporadically trying to kill them.

In Afghanistan, the Taliban is gradually making a comeback.

Now, add Dr Destroyer's 20,000 strong force to this mix: detachments of US troops would be getting overwhelmed and destroyed on a daily basis.

The Destroyer's forces wouldn't be sitting around waiting to be chewed up in a stand-up fight - they would be using hit and run tactics against an opponent that has to disperse its forces to hold large swathes of hostile territory.

Of course, the logistics of all this is another matter. :)

Alan

[Broblawsky]

There's a fundamental difference there, assault - if Destroyer is freely given control of a country, we aren't going to be liberating it. We're going to be levelling it. Destroyer's organization is 20 times worse than Al Qaeda in the real world, and look at how many people wanted to use nuclear weapons in Afghnitan after 9/11.

[assault]

Originally posted by Broblawsky
There's a fundamental difference there, assault - if Destroyer is freely given control of a country, we aren't going to be liberating it. We're going to be levelling it. Destroyer's organization is 20 times worse than Al Qaeda in the real world, and look at how many people wanted to use nuclear weapons in Afghnitan after 9/11.

Sure. So the question becomes: why does the Destroyer _want_ the US to nuke Nairobi?

Some aspects of the Master Plan are obvious enough: for example, VIPER's headquarters are in West Africa, and dragging the US into the area would cause conflict between two of Destroyer's most serious rivals.

The whole thing may actually be fairly simple: to create a global war pitting the Third World against the First World. This would, of course, be a war fought between superbeings, as well as between armies. Dr Destroyer would, of course, participate in this to the extent that he deems convenient, ensuring the balance of power tips the way he wants it to.

Alan

[Polaris]

Alan: Very well put..:)

Rest: If the US could so easily defeat "scores" of LDCs, why are there any bases of al Qaeda left? Why is Iran allowed to build a nuclear weapons program? Why is North Korea allowed its weapons proliferation programs (which they have already said they intend to SELL on the international market)? The US does have limited military forces... scarcity... that can be spread too thin.

As we 'level' countries that side with Dr. D, what stops him from using that massive weapon hidden in orbit from destroying New York or Washington?

There are nations with the ability to deter the western powers. The key is having weapons that ensures "unacceptable consequences" (such as the USSR had).

Kristopher: You say we shouldn't "think for one second" that the western powers don't have troops every bit as well trained and well equipped as anything Dr. Destroyer can field... his troops are 300 point characters. If someone were to play a US soldier in my game, I would not give them 300 points. I do not believe our troops are 300 points, but I guess we can agree to disagree.


You then go on to say: "Ah yes, another person who thinks that once you accept one fantastic premise in creating your setting, you have to accept them all.

A solid worldbuilding process actually goes something like this: once you assume the fantastic element of super-powers, from there proceed in a logical manner to develop the rest of the world.

The typical comic book setting is different in dozens of ways from the real world, and most of those differences have nothing to do with -- and no bearing -- on the presence of super-powers. The people don't act like real people. The governments don't act like real governments. Never mind the inconsistencies and contradictions that build up like plaque in the setting's arteries."

In many role playing games of superheroes, people seek to simulate the comic books. You bring up an interesting point that sometimes comic books do not get stuck on being 'real' or as close to 'real' as possible... they try to come up with a good story. That, to me, is what role playing is about. There method seems to be working quite well, and I suspect will continue.

Polaris

[Kristopher]

Originally posted by assault
You can't be paying attention to the news at the moment.

Half the US military is sitting around in Iraq surrounded by people who hate them and are at least sporadically trying to kill them.

In Afghanistan, the Taliban is gradually making a comeback.

Now, add Dr Destroyer's 20,000 strong force to this mix: detachments of US troops would be getting overwhelmed and destroyed on a daily basis.

The Destroyer's forces wouldn't be sitting around waiting to be chewed up in a stand-up fight - they would be using hit and run tactics against an opponent that has to disperse its forces to hold large swathes of hostile territory.

Of course, the logistics of all this is another matter. :)

Alan

Who said anything about holding the territory? Given this nightmare scenario, the western powers would mainly be concerned with devestating the military and industrial infrastructure needed by Destroyerania to build and maintain his fantastic military. You can't hide heavy industry.

[Kristopher]

Originally posted by Polaris
Alan: Very well put..:)

Rest: If the US could so easily defeat "scores" of LDCs, why are there any bases of al Qaeda left? Why is Iran allowed to build a nuclear weapons program? Why is North Korea allowed its weapons proliferation programs (which they have already said they intend to SELL on the international market)? The US does have limited military forces... scarcity... that can be spread too thin.

As we 'level' countries that side with Dr. D, what stops him from using that massive weapon hidden in orbit from destroying New York or Washington?

There are nations with the ability to deter the western powers. The key is having weapons that ensures "unacceptable consequences" (such as the USSR had).


The western powers try to be halfway decent about things.

A scenario has been proposed that would be such a nightmare as to fundamentally change that. We're talking about a scenario that allies the western powers, China, Russia, and all their allies against 10 to 20 third-world nations. A scenario in which they can't afford to be even halfway decent.



Kristopher: You say we shouldn't "think for one second" that the western powers don't have troops every bit as well trained and well equipped as anything Dr. Destroyer can field... his troops are 300 point characters. If someone were to play a US soldier in my game, I would not give them 300 points. I do not believe our troops are 300 points, but I guess we can agree to disagree.
[/B]

If Dr D can field 20,000 300-point troops, what makes you think that US can't field at least that many, never mind the rest of the western powers? This question isn't the same as claiming that real-life US troops would be 300-point characters.

If Dr D can field city-busting orbital weapons, what makes you think that the western powers don't have a way to take those weapons out?



You then go on to say: "Ah yes, another person who thinks that once you accept one fantastic premise in creating your setting, you have to accept them all.

A solid worldbuilding process actually goes something like this: once you assume the fantastic element of super-powers, from there proceed in a logical manner to develop the rest of the world.

The typical comic book setting is different in dozens of ways from the real world, and most of those differences have nothing to do with -- and no bearing -- on the presence of super-powers. The people don't act like real people. The governments don't act like real governments. Never mind the inconsistencies and contradictions that build up like plaque in the setting's arteries."

In many role playing games of superheroes, people seek to simulate the comic books. You bring up an interesting point that sometimes comic books do not get stuck on being 'real' or as close to 'real' as possible... they try to come up with a good story. That, to me, is what role playing is about. There method seems to be working quite well, and I suspect will continue.

Polaris [/B]

You can't have a good story in a poorly-made setting.

--

Kristopher

[Lupus]

Originally posted by Kristopher
You can't have a good story in a poorly-made setting. Well, that's a judgment call, and depends on what you're looking for in a good setting. In your opinion, a world that doesn't conform to your conception of the real world is a bad setting. Superhero settings, however, are defined by theme and genre as much as by realism. Straying too far from realism is silly, yes. But according to the genre, certain levels of realism-straying are just fine. Any complaints of 'bad world creation' in these cases are personal style. Doesn't fit your style, fine. That doesn't mean it's bad for all groups. :)

As for your other complaints, yes, you make points. However, no-one's saying 'the US would lose.' What I in particular was saying was 'these are things that Destroyer could do to make things more difficult and more complex so that it doesn't just come down to number of troops vs number of troops.'

Superhero universe genre convention: it is possible for one lone madman to have better technology than an entire country. Yes. Even the most advanced country in the world. Thsi is because we are in a world where people can leap tall buildings - because Destroyer also has a superpower, and that superpower is intelligence and technical ability. He's as good in that as bricks are at punching things. This makes such ridiculous things possible - it logically follows on. you can assume that he has various tamper-proofing safeguards on his technology to prevent reverse-engineering. He has incredible technology. He has hidden bases. He has hidden manufacturing plants. He has troops approaching superhero status. He has technology he can give to the third-world armies to improve their firepower. He has ways and means to remove air power from the situation and blind surveillance. The US, in short, would not simply be fighting ragtag militias. They'd be fighting a technologically-superior foe.

All of this means is: yes, Destroyer would be a serious threat. He wouldn't just be a speedbump to western armies. Arguments can be mounted that he'd lose, arguments can be mounted that he'd win. No-one's denying that he wouldn't simply kick everyone's butt. :/ However, I maintain that it wouldn't be one-sided in the other direction, either. Chances are, he'd be taken out eventually, but it'd take some heroic intervention - say, the stuff seen in an average roleplaying session.

[Broblawsky]

The point I, and people on my side, are trying to make is that Destroyer, while certainly capable of giving ANY country a great deal of trouble, simply does not have the resources, as of his writeup, to hold control of a (or several) countries against a vastly numerically-superior foe. Offensively, he is formidable, and easily capable of devastating any small country's military; however, as our recent experience in Iraq has shown, defending a position once conquered is a far more difficult problem.

However, the scenario could easily work better with a change of villain: I would suggest Istvatha V'Han. V'Han is pretty much unknown to most of the world, and certainly to the public at large, and if she were to therefore sponsor several third-world countries, even if she did provoke a military response from the US, said response would doubtless be held up in the UN (assuming she assumed control of the countries in question relatively peacefully). Moreover, V'Han would definitely improve the standard of living of the countries that submit to her, as it's a part of her strategy to maintain control of that which she conquers.
Of course, the individual countries (and whatever resources they may have) are irrelevant to V'Han. What she really needs is a beachhead and a month or two to quietly 'port in couple of million D-Soldiers, and appropriate armor, air and logistical support. The US would be prevented from doing what needs to be done by international political pressure (the UN, "Leave V'Hansylvania alone" protests around the world) until it was too late, leaving it up to the PCs to stop V'Han before she summons too many of her forces to be defeated.

[assault]

Originally posted by Broblawsky
The point I, and people on my side, are trying to make is that Destroyer, while certainly capable of giving ANY country a great deal of trouble, simply does not have the resources, as of his writeup, to hold control of a (or several) countries against a vastly numerically-superior foe. Offensively, he is formidable, and easily capable of devastating any small country's military; however, as our recent experience in Iraq has shown, defending a position once conquered is a far more difficult problem.

This is why his initial conquest needs to be "voluntary" (or rather, I suspect, probably "stealthy"). He can't afford to be fighting the population of the nations he rules.

On the other hand, he can't stand up to a direct offensive launched by developed nations either. He has to duck such blows, and put them on the defensive instead. This would only work if he has a reasonable degree of popular support - which he is perfectly capable of losing! In fact, this is probably the point where PC heroes could intervene, exposing the manipulation he engaged in to gain his initial control.

Of course, he also has the option of the more traditional WMD route. It's entirely genre standard for a mastermind to threaten the world with a super-weapon, blah blah blah. In fact, Dr Destroyer's first appearance in "The Island of Dr Destroyer" was precisely in this role. For that reason, I would be a little careful assuming he already has WMDs: he is too likely to attempt to use them in the traditional extortionist manner. But, of course, that raises the question of how did he destroy Detroit.

To be perfectly frank, I'm not incredibly impressed by the current version of DD. He's actually a bit too much for my tastes. But I suppose he has to be a match for every theoretically playable PC group.

The main disagreement in this thread has really been between "real world" and "genre" simulation. I'm a genre simulator, of course. Part of this, aside from sheer taste, is that I have a rather cynical view of attempts to model the "real world", since such models tend to reflect the prejudices of the designer. And frankly, I'm a very serious offender in this area myself.

I've also taken careful note of attempts to be "relevant", like the good old "Supersons" saga, which combines risible Silver Age silliness with bizarre "generation gap" plotlines. It was a wonderful case of a failed attempt to move from the Silver Age to the Bronze Age. At the same time, however, I am a very great fan of the Green Arrow/Green Lantern stories of more or less the same period, which were marvellous pieces of early Bronze Age work.

What I am getting at, I suppose, is that trying to be too "realistic" can often simply lead to clowning, and frankly doesn't even make stuff particularly fun.

Hmm. Perhaps a "seanbaby" game might be a good idea: four-colour camp with a "realistic" attitude...

Time to break out my Heroclix miniatures and ***Toy Dinosaurs***.

You can't not have fun with Toy Dinosaurs. :)

Alan