The Last Hurrah (adventure for your use)

[Agent X]

> You are being incredibly unfair.

Stating the bald and simple facts of the situation is unfair? Sheesh.

> This is the post where he eplained how the team turned: [snip]

[bigsnip]

I read it already, thank you. I didn't need the replay.

No -- that is the post where he completely retconned his originally posted scenario because of the response it had gotten, but still tried to pretend that he hadn't gotten anything wrong.

See Trebuchet's original response on that point, it says it far better than I could.

His original scenario was massively flawed and in general, it bit. You can't change that. You shouldn't be trying to. Because, if nothing else, you *know* it's not gonna work.

His original post was incomplete. That hardly requires the savaging he has received.

[Chuckg]

> His original post was incomplete.

No, it was flat /wrong/.

"Incomplete" is an ass-covering fiction being peddled here to try and save face. Please. We are experienced comics fans here. We can /tell/ when the writer is retconning not because he had it in mind all along, but because he's been caught with his pants down and is scrambling like hell to recover a fumble.

Edit -- not to mention that even the retconned version still has at least two significant plot holes, both of which I mentioned in the past half hour.

Oh, and 'savaging'? This, from /you/? To /me/? *hollow laugh*

[Agent X]

> His original post was incomplete.

No, it was flat /wrong/.

"Incomplete" is an ass-covering fiction being peddled here to try and save face. Please. We are experienced comics fans here. We can /tell/ when the writer is retconning not because he had it in mind all along, but because he's been caught with his pants down and is scrambling like hell to recover a fumble.

Edit -- not to mention that even the retconned version still has at least two significant plot holes, both of which I mentioned in the past half hour.

Oh, and 'savaging'? This, from /you/? To /me/? *hollow laugh*

I'll read his posts again to see what CHANGED as opposed to what details were ADDED.

[Chuckg]

Make sure to note that Crackerjacker first made 4-5 posts stubbornly defending his original idea as written(*) with no add-ons, and then suddenly switched to 'oh it was incomplete' and 'oh here's the villain who drove them insane' only after Trebuchet happened to mention (somewhere on page 2) that mass insanity like this would only be even halfway believable if nutso #1 was a mentalist who then went on to deliberately derange nutso #2-5.

Not only was it a retconned idea after the fact, it probably wasn't even his own damn idea.






(*) Instead of, ummm, you know, going 'damn, forgot to mention this stuff I'd had written out all along' as post number two...

[ghost-angel]

We are talking about the President who had the "Star Wars" defense system on the drawing board right?

Reagan did a lot of good, he did a lot of not so good, that happens with all world leaders because it has been said "You can please some of the people most of the time, most of the people some of the time but never all of the people all of the time."

Now... if for the scenario Reagan had a secret underground base where he could launch all the nukes from and be safe - how many 80s era movies had that exact same plot bit?

And ... oh my! The Nuclear Football, right, let's not forget that every president since Nixon (or was it before) had a US Marine carry around a remote launching system in a briefcase everywhere they went.

If a president during the Cold War could make and form a super loyal super force wouldn't they commission one? And then the scientists training and conditioning them might go a little overboard ... making fanatics.

So the fanatics go crazy and THINK their dear president's last wishes were to blow up the planet.

The whole thing sounds like a good plot since politics are often misinterpreted by everyone. Heck, I thought Reagan was ready to drop the bomb any day ... you've got a whole movement who thought so as well - predominately punks. Anyone else remember Reagan Youth? What about the Phil Collins video where Puppet Reagan pushes the wrong button?

So what if Reagan looks like a psychopath in the scenario - a lot of people thought he was. Get Over It.

Crackerjacker - your scenario is fine, could use tweaking to fit into someone elses campaign.
Everyone else - chill, it's a post about a game where reality is mutable.

[Chuckg]

> We are talking about the President who had the "Star Wars" defense
> system on the drawing board right?

Do you even know what 'Star Wars' *is*? Hint -- it's *not* an end-the-world system. It's *not* a death system.

It was designed to be a nuclear *shield* -- the interception and destruction of inbound ballistic missiles.

The reasons the Russians had a coronary about it is because it would hamper their ability to play the nuclear blackmail card... which was the best card in their hand.

[snip]
> Now... if for the scenario Reagan had a secret underground base where he
> could launch all the nukes from and be safe - how many 80s era movies
> had that exact same plot bit?

And the launch codes are still valid after 16 years? Please. The rotation cycle on those codes is, ummm, more frequent than that.

> And ... oh my! The Nuclear Football, right, let's not forget that every
> president since Nixon (or was it before) had a US Marine carry around a
> remote launching system in a briefcase everywhere they went.

Yes, and that code changes damn near every freakin' day... so using Reagan's old codes from 16 years ago is *null*.

Not to mention that those codes don't plug into launch systems. There is no one button that makes all the ICBMs fly once pushed.

The launch codes plug into cryptogrpahic authentication systems that then tell the human beings on the other end in NORAD that 'Yeah, that's the President, not Rich Little.'

Said human beings then have to tell other human beings (silo officers and sub captains) to turn keys.

And before they order the launch officers to turn keys, they'd first look to see if a nuclear war was actually going on. Unless the American mainland had first been nuked, CINC-NORAD's response to receiving a launch order -- especially an end-the-world launch-all-the-birds order -- would not be to launch. It would be to call back and verify. A lot.

For a *good* fictional treatise on the above, read Tom Clancy's _Sum Of All Fears_. (Read, not watch. The movie is way different from the book.)

[snip]
> The whole thing sounds like a good plot since politics are often
> misinterpreted by everyone. Heck, I thought Reagan was ready to drop the
> bomb any day ...

No *wonder* it sounds like a good plot to you.

[snip]
> So what if Reagan looks like a psychopath in the scenario - a lot of people
> thought he was. Get Over It.



Yeah, right, now imagine your response when I hit your hot button and then tell *you* "A lot of peple think so, so Get Over It."

It's always fun when it's the other guy's ox to gore, right?

I wouldn't treat even Bill Clinton -- who's pretty much absolute last on my list of favorite Presidents -- the way you so cavalierly treat, oh, not only Ronald Reagan but apparently the entirety of NORAD and (the now-defunct) Strategic Air Command.

And not only do you not know, you *know* you don't know, and you don't *care*.

[Kirby]

We are talking about the President who had the "Star Wars" defense system on the drawing board right?

I'm not sure what you're suggesting here, but the Star Wars defense system concept is in effect, although greatly altered. The U.S. Air Force has a least three planes that are designed to stop missiles by laser, at least one of which was flying during Desert Storm. The laser has been researched since that kid tried melting chocolate with it. The existance of it as a successful weapon was declassified around five years ago.

That being said, your Nucelar Football is completely off.

Crackerjacker - your scenario is fine, could use tweaking to fit into someone elses campaign.

(Shudders at the thought of first statement.)
How about, "Crackerjacker, your scenario is fine for your campaign, but will have to be (severely?) modified to fit in anyone else's campaign."

I think the tension on this thread stems from a few things, each leading to the rising tension of the one following:

1. The title had "adventure for your use," instead of something like "my campaign/adventure, what do you think?"
2a. Most people didn't like the portrayel of Reagan.
2b. Many people stated the implausibility of the plot as a whole, or how it would have to be changed for their campaign.
3. Crackerjacker was upset at all critiques and suggestions that didn't praise his thread and states repeatedly that you can't change the plot.
4. Axent X comes in nitpicking nearly every post that doesn't agree with Crackerjacker. Comments basically state the Crackerjacker is completely correct because he posted it and all others are wrong for finding faults with his scenario. Axent X also states he can't use the scenario as-is, and will change it.

Everyone else - chill....

Yes, and this time when I tell myself I'm not going to come back here, I'm going to remember to unsubscribe to this thread. Silly me.
As my parting words (aside from my signature), I would just like to suggest again to Crackerjacker that next time no one responds to your thread, just move on.

[Chuckg]

Hell, just saw another plot hole...

... a secret launch system valid from 16 years ago? The warheads get rotated more often than once every 16 years! It's not even the same missiles out there, let alone the same codes!

(radioactive decay slowly affects integrated circuits. bombs have limited shelf-life)

[Agent X]

I'm not sure what you're suggesting here, but the Star Wars defense system concept is in effect, although greatly altered. The U.S. Air Force has a least three planes that are designed to stop missiles by laser, at least one of which was flying during Desert Storm. The laser has been researched since that kid tried melting chocolate with it. The existance of it as a successful weapon was declassified around five years ago.

That being said, your Nucelar Football is completely off.


(Shudders at the thought of first statement.)
How about, "Crackerjacker, your scenario is fine for your campaign, but will have to be (severely?) modified to fit in anyone else's campaign."

I think the tension on this thread stems from a few things, each leading to the rising tension of the one following:

1. The title had "adventure for your use," instead of something like "my campaign/adventure, what do you think?"
2a. Most people didn't like the portrayel of Reagan.
2b. Many people stated the implausibility of the plot as a whole, or how it would have to be changed for their campaign.
3. Crackerjacker was upset at all critiques and suggestions that didn't praise his thread and states repeatedly that you can't change the plot.
4. Axent X comes in nitpicking nearly every post that doesn't agree with Crackerjacker. Comments basically state the Crackerjacker is completely correct because he posted it and all others are wrong for finding faults with his scenario. Axent X also states he can't use the scenario as-is, and will change it.


Yes, and this time when I tell myself I'm not going to come back here, I'm going to remember to unsubscribe to this thread. Silly me.
As my parting words (aside from my signature), I would just like to suggest again to Crackerjacker that next time no one responds to your thread, just move on.

Kirby, please don't put words in my mouth.

[Agent X]

Hell, just saw another plot hole...

... a secret launch system valid from 16 years ago? The warheads get rotated more often than once every 16 years! It's not even the same missiles out there, let alone the same codes!

(radioactive decay slowly affects integrated circuits. bombs have limited shelf-life)

Big Deal. Major Motion Pictures have plot holes that big. It may not even be a plot hole considering the Juggernaut is a secret secret weapon. Heck, the former government official working with them may have had an "in" to get current codes if they were needed.

And I've just read the first post and his post supplying more detail concerning the relationship of the team with Reagan and how they turned. Everything is consistent. There is no way short of telepathy to prove any accusation of backpedalling or retconning on his part.

[Chuckg]

> Big Deal. Major Motion Pictures have plot holes that big.

"If everybody else jumped off a cliff, would you jump too?"

-- moms around the world

[snip]
> And I've just read the first post and his post supplying more detail
> concerning the relationship of the team with Reagan and how they turned.
> Everything is consistent. There is no way short of telepathy to prove any
> accusation of backpedalling or retconning on his part.

Of course there is.

If he'd had it written all along but had just forgotten to tell us about it, it would ahve been in post #2.

As is, he spent two pages arguing heatedly that there was nothing wrong and it needed no fixing...

... before he suddenly posted his, ahem, 'supplemental'.

Absolute telepathy-binding proof? Obviously not.

But 'nothing'? Obviously not either.

[Agent X]

> Big Deal. Major Motion Pictures have plot holes that big.

"If everybody else jumped off a cliff, would you jump too?"

-- moms around the world

[snip]
> And I've just read the first post and his post supplying more detail
> concerning the relationship of the team with Reagan and how they turned.
> Everything is consistent. There is no way short of telepathy to prove any
> accusation of backpedalling or retconning on his part.

Of course there is.

If he'd had it written all along but had just forgotten to tell us about it, it would ahve been in post #2.

As is, he spent two pages arguing heatedly that there was nothing wrong and it needed no fixing...

... before he suddenly posted his, ahem, 'supplemental'.

Absolute telepathy-binding proof? Obviously not.

But 'nothing'? Obviously not either.

The two posts don't read that way. The supplementary post in question uses very similar language and fits very well. If this is "retconning" then this high school kid is very, very good at it. And I see no reason to assume someone is lying because they might be. Given that he hasn't been caught in anything like a lie, I see no reason to assume the worst.

[Chuckg]

> The two posts don't read that way.

Try reading the 4-5 in between as well.

[Agent X]

> The two posts don't read that way.

Try reading the 4-5 in between as well.

I read them. He brings up that he made changes in the scenario from his campaign world to make it a bit more accessible for others to use and defends the use of Reagan. I believe the reason he is adamant about using Reagan is that he mentions that the Minutemens' motivation for using the Juggernaut is his death. He didn't explain why it would lose "force or uniqueness (originality)" very well but I don't believe he thought a rabid debate was in store because he dared to use a real world political figure. You and Treb and Kirby all overreacted, imo.

[Chuckg]

> I read them. He brings up that he made changes in the scenario from his
> campaign world to make it a bit more accessible for others to use

... because in his campaign's own timeline, the Minutemen are on their *second* attempt to end the world in nuclear fire, and he thinks that might prove a bit hard to put into the backstory of other campaigns. So he suggests having the 16-years-later meltdown run be their 1st, not their 2nd.

That is the *only* 'adapting' change he suggests until after Trebuchet's post about the mentalist driving people insane.

AAMOF, up until that point, here's CJ's posts on just just why the Minutemen went nuts...

"The Minutemen are perhaps my favorite among the villain groups Iv created, they were Ronald Reagan's enforcer supergroup of conservative, nationalistic, and in some cases outright violent/racist/delluded superhumans, that together were worldbeaters."

"I know some things about him, so I'm not just uncharacteristically doing things, but listen to this... the idea of Reagan having showy, superpowerfull supers (as opposed to more lowkey and well...sane ones) seemed to fit perfectly. As I understand he was all about boasting, showing everyone else in the world that America was boss, and etc. (sp)"

"And the idea is that the Minutemen went mad with power, and in some ways tried to "pull an authority", which united the whole world, Soviet Union and USA against them. And I'm not saying that in my setting Reagan wanted a nuclear hellfire...the Minutemen are Cold Warrior fanatics. Theyre the equivalent of Jack Chick or Al Quaida, but to American cold war nationalist policy, not Christianity or Islam."

"That is the one thing Im trying to say. It's not a partisan hatchet job. Its just as plausible as any supers story, and there is nothing more "politically motivated" about Reagan having a secret nuclear base and recruiting superhumans he knew were unstable [...]"

These are from the four posts, in order, that CJ wrote before Trebuchet posted his mass insanity idea.

Notice a common trend?

In every post, the Minutemen are *explicitly* stated as to have been fucking crazy -- violent, nationalistic, neo-fascist thug-brains -- all along. No supervillain mentalist coming along and driving them nuts. No nothing. Nope, they were recruited *because* they were unstable, kept on all the while they were unstable, and got even more unstable after their 'master' Reagan died.

If you are going to claim that CJ meant all along that the Minutemen had their nihilistic insanity caused by an outside force, and simply didn't make that clear early on, and that his 'umm, some supervillain must have mindwhacked them all' post is merely a clarification and *not* a back-pedalling retcon...

... then you are flying in complete and total contradiction of what's repeatedly on the page in black and white, and I call bullshit to the max.