Jane's Superhumans

[megaplayboy]

Re: Jane's Superhumans

 

To try to put the thread back on-topic: how powerful would a single superhuman have to be in order to defeat the world's military forces by themselves, in say, a period of a year or less?

 

you can answer in real-world or game terms.

[nexus]

Re: Jane's Superhumans

 

To try to put the thread back on-topic: how powerful would a single superhuman have to be in order to defeat the world's military forces by themselves, in say, a period of a year or less?

 

you can answer in real-world or game terms.

 

Just to take a stab at it, Pre Crisis Superman level?

[megaplayboy]

Re: Jane's Superhumans

 

Just to take a stab at it' date=' Pre Crisis Superman level?[/quote']

 

The 1st Ed. DC Heroes writeup, or the way he's actually presented in the comics?

[Lightray]

It is a blanket ban against people possessing massive deadly force casually entering the courtroom' date=' regardless of the source of their power, be it technological or genetic. Would you care to explain how a blanket ban aganst just those possessing that force via technological means is any less respecting of warrants, probably cause, or judicial necessity, and isnt based on a presumption of guilt? [/quote']

There is a certain presumption of intent in banning weapons from courtrooms (and other places).

 

But, again, these are weapons banned, not people. Of all places to make that ridiculous leap of logic, a court is the least likely.

 

Courts do selectively treat attendees with prejudice, though -- violence-prone defendants are restrained. So, while a court would not ban a person because a person is NOT a weapon, a court might impose some other accomodation upon potentially risky super-humans present.

 

e.g., "Radioactive Man, you must wear this containment suit when appearing before the court."

 

Uh, what physical evidence? Even if the court appointed Mind Violator...er, pardon me, Mental Investigator...determines that MentalMan is lying, it isnt physical evidence. It is isolated testimony from an individual who has NO OTHER WITNESSES or other "experts" to support his claim. Perhaps you'd like to bring in a team of mind probers next so they can corroborate eachother's testimony? Of course, the defence can bring in a pile of its own (weaker?) mentalists who will claim that they detect no falsehood in MM's story, throwing doubt onto the entire 'mind probe' testimony.

 

... Something like this comes down to asking the jury to convict based on just the word of the court appointed mentalist. I'm not saying it wont work, but I am thinking such an arrangement is incredibly ripe for abuse.

Yeah, telepathic evidence is unlikely to ever be anything more than an expert witness vs. expert witness parade. Your telepath makes claims, and his telepath refutes them. But, oy! what a can of worms this is!

 

Isn't Court Telepath's testimony about reading the witness' mind hearsay? IIRC, that's a no-no in American courts.

 

Come to think, telepathic evidence may fall into the "spectral evidence" category, against which there are many laws on the books since the Salem trials. To rise to the level of "expert testimony" your Court Telepath will need to be independently verified -- and those findings accepted by the general scientific community.

 

The law has to be stringent about allowing "mind control" as a defense or claim. I think to get it accepted, you'll need to prove it happened -- and prove it by means other than the testimony of another telepath.

[Guest Worldmaker]

Re: Jane's Superhumans

 

One last comment: Any law that a person can violate merely by being' date=' is a law we neither need nor should have.[/quote']

 

 

Bills of attainder are unconstitutional, thank God.

[nexus]

Re: Jane's Superhumans

 

The 1st Ed. DC Heroes writeup' date=' or the way he's actually presented in the comics? [/quote']

 

The comics.

 

For a more contemporary example, The Authority as presented in Authority:Revolution. Counting the Carrier, of course.

[Chuckg]

Re: Jane's Superhumans

 

Bills of attainder are unconstitutional' date=' thank God.[/quote']

 

OK, Worldmaker, I give you full credit -- dude, this line of reasoning *ROCKS*.

 

And I'm kicking myself for being so blind as to not see it myself.

[Guest bblackmoor]

Re: Jane's Superhumans

 

I would think that deep probing someone's mind' date=' even with a warrant, would be a violation of their 5th Amendment right to not be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against themselves.[/quote']

 

Actually, courts compel people to witness against themselves all the time (providing DNA, providing samples of bodily fluids, providing passwords for accounts, etc.). I would not consider mental probing all that more invasive. The problem is that it's difficult to objectively verify. In that respect, it may be considered more akin to taking a polygraph, which may not be admissible in court as evidence, depending on the jurisdiction.

 

I think it's a given that state-sponsored mind-reading would ignite a chorus of protests, though, no matter how well or how badly it is actually implemented. Whether those protests would have any effect depends so completely on the politics of the moment, it's anyone's guess what the outcome would be (who would have thought that DNA testing of people accused of crimes would ever be considered blase?).

[megaplayboy]

Re: Jane's Superhumans

 

The comics.

 

For a more contemporary example, The Authority as presented in Authority:Revolution. Counting the Carrier, of course.

 

well, that's a whole group, though. I'm thinking in terms of a single super.

[Kirby]

Re: Jane's Superhumans

 

In your vision' date=' the superpowered are allowed the liberty of walking about in the possession of extremely deadly force at all times, yet the average man is not so allowed. Sounds to me like your vision also discriminates against some people based on the circumstances of their birth. Those -not- born superpowered are less equal than those who are, and are effectively second class citizens. To be fair, if you're going to allow the superpowered to be armed and dangerous at all times, you should allow the non-superpowered to be so also, though they might require a prosthesis to make up for what nature didnt build in. Machineguns and Nukes for EVERYONE![/quote']

is as does.

 

Do you even understand the concept of "all men are created equal?" It's not saying that everyone is supposed to be born with the same appearance, the same strength, nor the same finances. Despite what Jefferson actually meant* it has come to mean that all people have equal rights. Blacks, whites, men, women, all have the same right to vote, all have the same opportunity for success, and all have the same right to pursue happiness.

 

*For anyone who's interested:Gary Willis, in his study of the Declaration (Inventing America, 1978), tells us that Jefferson means equal in possessing a moral sense: "The moral sense is not only man's highest faculty, but the one that is equal to all men." [The Norton Anthology of American Literature, Sixth Edition, Volume A, 2003]

 

 

Now, to break down your idotic, misconstrued reasoning of my 'vision.'

 

In your vision' date=' the superpowered are allowed the liberty of walking about in the possession of extremely deadly force at all times, yet the average man is not so allowed.[/quote']

Never said that. Did I ever say that the man with four arms is allowed to carry machines guns? Did I mention that Regeneration Randy should have a nuke? Nope. You are assuming over and over (again "fear factor") that simply because a super exists, they're going to have extremely deadly powers. Have I stated that LazerEye Boy should be allowed to walk around with an Uzi? No I have not.

 

 

Sounds to me like your vision also discriminates against some people based on the circumstances of their birth. Those -not- born superpowered are less equal than those who are' date=' and are effectively second class citizens.[/quote']

How does even your reasoning see me stating that? Why would the rest of society be shifted to a lesser status because of a few people? Have I ever mentioned that those born with super powers should be given extra privlidges, such as first chance at buying a home? Have I suggested that someone being able to see through brick walls should be allowed to drive while others aren't? No.

 

 

To be fair' date=' if you're going to allow the superpowered to be armed and dangerous at all times, you should allow the non-superpowered to be so also, though they might require a prosthesis to make up for what nature didnt build in. Machineguns and Nukes for EVERYONE![/quote']

Hopefully now you see how insane and irrational your "rationalization" is. And simply being armed and dangerous doesn't equal nuclear scale. If all citizens of town A are allowed to carry handguns, it doesn't mean that scaredy cat from town B needs to carry a machine gun or nuclear bomb to be equal. It probably doesn't even cross your mind that some people don't even *want* to carry weapons, even though they're permitted. Take Texas for example. You can buy a handgun to take home. If you want to a concealed weapons permit, you can register for that, too, but it doesn't mean that every Texas citizen of age has a handgun at home, much less a concealed weapon's permit. This probably escapes you.

 

We also don't regulate people who happen to be stronger than their neighbors. If 6'6" Muscleman Mike just finished winning Mr. Universe and goes into a store where 5'2" Weakling Willy is, Willy doesn't have an instant right to extra weapon power to make sure the two are evenly matched.

 

Muscleman Mike comes from a stronger family, his genes are stronger and that helps him out. His genes also helped him reach 6'6" since both of his parents are tall. Weakling Willy unfortunately has short parents who come from a short line of people. His parents weren't active and never encouraged Willy to excercise, and thus the Weakling Willy. Is this now a crime? Does this make Willy a second class citizen? No.

[Guest bblackmoor]

Re: Jane's Superhumans

 

Personally' date=' I find that in a genre of fiction/gaming about exceptional people doing exceptional things, and heroism, and hope, and all that jazz, that designing your scenarios on the premise that the human race will always fuck it up big at crunch time to be really missing the point of playing the game. But that's just me.[/quote']

 

Good lord, I don't run or play in superhero games that are realistic. Part of the appeal of the superhero (aka Champions) genre is that the protagonists are (usually) stronger, braver, and more idealistic than normal folks, and that the antagonists are more than morally-bankrupt half-wits who turned to crime because they're too stupid to keep a real job.

[Guest Worldmaker]

Re: Jane's Superhumans

 

Good lord' date=' I don't run or play in superhero games that are [i']realistic[/i]. Part of the appeal of the superhero (aka Champions) genre is that the protagonists are (usually) stronger, braver, and more idealistic than normal folks, and that the antagonists are more than morally-bankrupt half-wits who turned to crime because they're too stupid to keep a real job.

 

 

Well spoke.

[nexus]

Re: Jane's Superhumans

 

well' date=' that's a whole group, though. I'm thinking in terms of a single super.[/quote']

 

Well, you didn't like Pre Crisis Supes.

 

[Guest bblackmoor]

Re: Jane's Superhumans

 

The law has to be stringent about allowing "mind control" as a defense or claim. I think to get it accepted' date=' you'll need to prove it happened -- and prove it by means other than the testimony of another telepath.[/quote']

 

That would be a really weird area. You think legislatures and courts have had trouble grasping crime and contracts in the "digital age"? That would be nothing compared to the chaos that would usher in the "psionic age".

 

(I would say "psychic age", but that makes me think of the mid 1970s.)

[megaplayboy]

Re: Jane's Superhumans

 

Well, you didn't like Pre Crisis Supes.

 

 

No, he works, but I think he'd probably defeat the world's military in an afternoon. Give him a year and he'd subjugate the Federation

[Chuckg]

Re: Jane's Superhumans

 

Good lord' date=' I don't run or play in superhero games that are [i']realistic[/i].

 

*nods*

 

However, fantasy's usual job is to be nicer than reality, true, but that doesn't mean reality always has to bite it.

 

The fact that we are still using up oxygen as opposed to being down there in the hall o' extinct species with the dinosaurs is proof that while the human race is hardly perfect, we have to get it right at least *SOME* of the time.

[Kirby]

Re: Jane's Superhumans

 

To try to put the thread back on-topic: how powerful would a single superhuman have to be in order to defeat the world's military forces by themselves, in say, a period of a year or less?

 

you can answer in real-world or game terms.

Hmm... I would guess at least 1500 points. You'll have to have defenses against surviving a nuclear attack, and the fallout thereafter. Then you'll have to have either extremely high defenses that are hardened, or lots of damage reduction.

 

I don't think one person could do it. Eventually, it would come to either a country launching all their battallions at this person that fatigue would kick in, or several countries might coordinate a nuclear strike ("Hey, let's sacrifice Sierre Leone for the good of the world") or one country might launch several nuclear weapons at the same spot the person is fighting, maybe one to two minute intervals between detonations if the person couldn't immediately flee after the first attack.

 

Think of it this way: Say you are that "PC" and you're attacking Country X. It is the second time you have waltzed through a country and obliterated their entire military and police forces. Since you aren't afraid of anyone or anything (yet) you are pretty much going in a straight line to a 1st world country. Maybe China, India, Germany, France, US or UK. When you are about 50 miles from the border of this world power, you are attacked by troops again. Unfortunately, these are a diversion. A special forces unit laser pinpoints your location and a nuclear submarine or a stealth bomber nukes you. You are dazed. You take several recoveries and start to leave, but are nuked again. And then a third time. Finally, you are knocked out. However, that nuclear submarine still has 13 more nukes on board. Ah, heck, better safe than sorry. They unleash all of them. Sure, that land is no longer habitable for next 100 years, at least. And lots of people have died. However, the single greatest threat to the planet has been eliminated.

 

Now, if said PC did not die, all of the world's powers might unleash havok on you. Nuclear weapons. Biological weapons. Chemical weapons. Poisons of all types. The neutron bomb would be 'reinvented' and used.

 

Aside from third world countries and France , I don't see nations surrendering to this guy.

 

Now, of course, simply because one is capable of taking on the world's military, doesn't mean one will. Superman didn't, though Dr. Destroyer didn't mind.

 

Just my first thought out scenario, mind you.

[Outsider]

Re: Jane's Superhumans

 

Kirby, is it possible for you to to be a tad (or a lot) less belligerent and insulting? Not only is it possible, but will you be?

 

I dont see where I've made any personal attacks on you that werent directly in response to your attacks on me in this thread, yet you've directed many, many attacks towards me, and my forebearance of your bad manners is at an end.

[nexus]

Re: Jane's Superhumans

 

No' date=' he works, but I think he'd probably defeat the world's military in an afternoon. Give him a year and he'd subjugate the Federation [/quote']

 

Oh, I aimed too high. How about Hyperion as presented in Supreme Power?

[Chuckg]

Re: Jane's Superhumans

 

Alternatively, there's pretending to surrender to him and hoping the celebratory week-long orgy you arranged for him is successful in getting at least one of your attempted backstabs(*) to work.

 

 

 

(*) For a value of 'backstab' that includes every possible sneak attack you can attempt, up to and including nanotech weapons confiscated or build for you by other metahumans who don't like the idea of this guy being king either. If you have such available, that is.

[megaplayboy]

Re: Jane's Superhumans

 

Hmm... I would guess at least 1500 points. You'll have to have defenses against surviving a nuclear attack, and the fallout thereafter. Then you'll have to have either extremely high defenses that are hardened, or lots of damage reduction.

 

I don't think one person could do it. Eventually, it would come to either a country launching all their battallions at this person that fatigue would kick in, or several countries might coordinate a nuclear strike ("Hey, let's sacrifice Sierre Leone for the good of the world") or one country might launch several nuclear weapons at the same spot the person is fighting, maybe one to two minute intervals between detonations if the person couldn't immediately flee after the first attack.

 

Think of it this way: Say you are that "PC" and you're attacking Country X. It is the second time you have waltzed through a country and obliterated their entire military and police forces. Since you aren't afraid of anyone or anything (yet) you are pretty much going in a straight line to a 1st world country. Maybe China, India, Germany, France, US or UK. When you are about 50 miles from the border of this world power, you are attacked by troops again. Unfortunately, these are a diversion. A special forces unit laser pinpoints your location and a nuclear submarine or a stealth bomber nukes you. You are dazed. You take several recoveries and start to leave, but are nuked again. And then a third time. Finally, you are knocked out. However, that nuclear submarine still has 13 more nukes on board. Ah, heck, better safe than sorry. They unleash all of them. Sure, that land is no longer habitable for next 100 years, at least. And lots of people have died. However, the single greatest threat to the planet has been eliminated.

 

Now, if said PC did not die, all of the world's powers might unleash havok on you. Nuclear weapons. Biological weapons. Chemical weapons. Poisons of all types. The neutron bomb would be 'reinvented' and used.

 

Aside from third world countries and France , I don't see nations surrendering to this guy.

 

Now, of course, simply because one is capable of taking on the world's military, doesn't mean one will. Superman didn't, though Dr. Destroyer didn't mind.

 

Just my first thought out scenario, mind you.

 

Well, if said super was built like a champs villain, there's probably at least one megascale attack in her arsenal. If the consequences of a failed kill attempt are the annihilation of a political capital or population center, things look a little different.

If they(human leadership) don't know for sure they can kill the super, but know the super can kill them, they have to contemplate the possibility of conditional surrender.

[Chuckg]

Re: Jane's Superhumans

 

I think the scenario above leaves the super unable to determine *WHICH* capital needs nuking.

[Guest bblackmoor]

Re: Jane's Superhumans

 

The fact that we are still using up oxygen as opposed to being down there in the hall o' extinct species with the dinosaurs is proof that while the human race is hardly perfect' date=' we have to get it right at least *SOME* of the time.[/quote']

 

True enough. It's easy to be discouraged by the things that haven't really improved in the last couple of thousand years, but obviously, a great deal has (in this part of the world, at least). I'm warm when it's cold and I'm dry when it's wet, and that's more than my great-grandparents could say at my age.

[megaplayboy]

Re: Jane's Superhumans

 

Oh' date=' I aimed too high. How about Hyperion as presented in Supreme Power?[/quote']

yeah, I could see it taking him a few months to a year, but he could probably pull it off.

[Kirby]

Re: Jane's Superhumans

 

Post 488:

Kirby, is it possible for you to to be a tad (or a lot) less belligerent and insulting? Not only is it possible, but will you be?

 

I dont see where I've made any personal attacks on you that werent directly in response to your attacks on me in this thread, yet you've directed many, many attacks towards me, and my forebearance of your bad manners is at an end.

I'm sure you didn't, but here it goes:

Post 428:

Perhaps one of you bright boys with the college educations would care to enlighten me on the proper way to express that WMDman is 100,000 times more dangerous than a normal man, instead of just mocking me? Or perhaps you're too busy acting like classist/elitist snobs to bother? Am I supposed to be tugging my forelock, bowing and scraping to my betters at this point?

 

Or is this a cases where one person's bigotry (actual, against people who didnt take statistics classes at some fancy college) being OK, while someone else's (hypothetical, against people who dont actually exist (the superpowered)) is reprehensible?

This doesn't include your twisting of my comments either. But yeah, this is the root of where it started.