WWYCD: Lost in a world without Supers; 9/11/2001

[Great Beyond]

Re: WWYCD: Lost in a world without Supers; 9/11/2001

 

The problem here is - well, it's kind of like the Titanic sinking. It's a major temporal event with ripples (good and evil) all over the time stream. To start playing god with time like that will probably lead to a MUCH worse event later on down the line. So someone like Great Beyond - with the eye on the much bigger picture - would probably let the events stand as they happened.

 

However, she would be in the background, quietly gathering evidence on what REALLY happened. Why did WTC building 7 collapse? Why were there reports of the sounds of bomb-like explosions going off. Why does the wreckage at the Pentagon not match up with what should have crashed - that sort of thing.

 

One way or another, she would either gather enough evidence to prove or dispel the rumors of conspiracy that linger around the events.

 

***EDIT***

Forgot about my other - Natasha. She's a simple brick, with simple needs - a good rumble. She'd book a flight on plane 1 and beat the stuffing out of the hijackers and then land the plane. Since it's not her world, time stream be damned - she'd take a week, build a time machine (her PHD in temporal physics and Weird Science should be more than enough to work with such primitive non-super equipment), and go back in time and whup ass on plane two's hijackers.

 

Wash, rinse, repeat until everyone is rounded up. Then she'd go yell at Bush for being a boob (a boob in general, not about specificly this event).

[TheRavenIs]

Re: WWYCD: Lost in a world without Supers; 9/11/2001

 

Actually what I expected I have gotten, Heroes being Heroes. I can understand a hero stepping in to save as many lives as they can. What I can not see is a HERO!!! not doing it.

[Great Beyond]

Re: WWYCD: Lost in a world without Supers; 9/11/2001

 

Actually what I expected I have gotten' date=' Heroes being Heroes. I can understand a hero stepping in to save as many lives as they can. What I can not see is a HERO!!! not doing it.[/quote']

 

Like I said - big picture. Not stopping the attacks does not necessarily make a character less heroic.

 

Lets use the Titanic as an example - we've got a hundred years of perspective to work from. The sinking of the Titanic meant several major changes in nautical safety: enough lifeboats for EVERY passenger, a uniform policy in distress signal flares, a 24 hour watch on the radio (the California's radio operator went to bed 2 hours before the iceberg hit), standardized distress calls - and it marked a milestone in the end of that big, opulent Rockefeller and JP Morgan lifestyle.

 

Now - lets say your characters is A HERO!!! and stops this tragedy. None of this would happen, or would happen much later (well, except for the Old School Money lifestyle - which was on the way out anyway. This was just the deathblow). So next time instead of 1,523 victims, it could be 3,000 people. Or perhaps it proves that over the top opulence isn't dead, and that lifestyle rolls on through the 20's, preventing the great depression (and having a ripple effect on WWII). Or JJ Astor doesn't die, meaning that he leads his financial empire a few more years - bringing about major impact in the world economy. Suddenly saving 1,500 lives means major alterations to the time line.

 

Same thing here. So you stop the planes and the towers remain standing. The Terrorists, now REALLY honked off at the White Devils try again in a couple of years - but this time they smuggle a nuke into the Superbowl. Instead of just the towers, 10,000 steelers fans and a major city pay the price. How do you feel with yourself now, Hero?

 

 

 

GB wouldnt stop the attacks because she knows she's not wise enough to know which outcome is better, and not arrogant enough to play god like that.

[nexus]

Re: WWYCD: Lost in a world without Supers; 9/11/2001

 

I see where you are coming from but to play devil's advocate how does Great Beyond justify taking any action at all? The present is just the past to someone else. Any action at all can have unforseen negative consequences in the future. Its also just as likely (from the grand perspective) that these character's actions might have unforseen positive consquences but I imagine, for allot of them what matters is that lives can be saved right NOW. It is their present and they can change it. Some might even think that's the reason this has happened and they've been given insight, particularly heros of a spirirtual or religous bent. Any act of heroism (or villiany) or any act that can possibly effect others is "playing God" to some extent. None of us can know what our actions might do or the long term and possibly subtle impact that they might have. If you want to take that to an extreme, the character's mere presence in this world has already set balls in motions, dominoes falling, etc that didn't happen before from the moment they appeared and interacted with anything if only only the infintesimal level. If the character can't get back to their present they can't avoid making changes. They already have from the start, from that point on its just a matter of (potential) scale.

[Great Beyond]

Re: WWYCD: Lost in a world without Supers; 9/11/2001

 

I see where you are coming from but to play devil's advocate how does Great Beyond justify taking any action at all? The present is just the past to someone else. Any action at all can have unforseen negative consequences in the future.

 

Ah, but you see - time travel and The Now are two different ball games all together. If the present is just the past to somebody else, then it's someone else's problem then too.

 

It all comes down to free will. To steal a line from the terminator, There is no fate but what we make. If GB were doing the hero thing in aught one, then you can bet your bottom dollar she'd be in New York making all the difference she can, but to mess with the natural order of things, to get a second chance to roll the dice, well that aint right.

 

If you want to take that to an extreme, the character's mere presence in this world has already set balls in motions, dominoes falling, etc that didn't happen before from the moment they appeared and interacted with anything if only only the infintesimal level. If the character can't get back to their present they can't avoid making changes. They already have from the start, from that point on its just a matter of (potential) scale.

 

Well, if we're running with an "Oh no, you stepped on a butterfly! Now the dinosaurs are going to rule the future world!" scenario, or if a Higher Power came and said "Sam and Al are currently busy. We need someone to set right what went wrong", then yeah - she'd throw in with the best of them. But until then, she'd maintain a low profile and minimize her impact on the past the best she could.

 

ASSUMING she got the green light to put right what once went wrong - step one would be a bomb threat to the Pentagon, and to pull the fire alarms on both towers about an half an hour before the first crash. That should be long enough for everyone to exacuate the building, but not long enough to determine that there's no fire and send everyone back in.

 

With the buildings clear, she'd intercept the planes far enough out to deflect their course from impact. She should fly fast enough to catch a jet, and jigging the tail rudder should be easy enough - and some ice into the engine should force a landing without crashing the plane. Then depending if a 250 MPH top speed is fast enough to get to DC (I'm not sure of the distance between the two points), haul ass to the Pentagon and do the same for plane three.

 

Now - the problem comes with the 4th plane. The only reason the passengers revolted was because of the news of what had happened. Without that motivation, the would be no uprising and plane would probably reach its target - and we don't know what that would have been. So hang out in DC, try and spot the plane and force it down - but depending on where it winds up going, she may not be able to react in time.

 

So end result - 3 out of 4 ain't bad.

[nexus]

Re: WWYCD: Lost in a world without Supers; 9/11/2001

 

 

Ah, but you see - time travel and The Now are two different ball games all together. If the present is just the past to somebody else, then it's someone else's problem then too.

 

It all comes down to free will. To steal a line from the terminator, There is no fate but what we make. If GB were doing the hero thing in aught one, then you can bet your bottom dollar she'd be in New York making all the difference she can, but to mess with the natural order of things, to get a second chance to roll the dice, well that aint right.

 

 

My point was "The Now" is relative. When you are in a time frame that is now. Once time travel comes into the picture everything becomes relative. If you are concerned with "big picture" you have to think in those terms. After all, from the perspetice of 2001 (in this alternate universe) SHE's the one that doesn't exist yet and is but a possibility. When you change frames of refrence, your understanding has to change. If there is no fate, there is no reason not to try and change things. If things were "meant" to be set then there would be no capabiity to change there and there is no garuntee that any change to the time is going to result in a larger disaster. Making that choice is the burden of power. This scenario gives the character that burden. When 9/11 becomes your NOW then it becomes your problem just as your action in the current NOW are you problem since they impact the future, yours and others. IF the time line can be changed it can be changed for the better or for the worse. Its less a "second chance to roll the dice" but more a reboot. The story doesn't have to end the same, the natural order allows it to be changed so there is no "right" version as that would change from your point of reference.

 

 

Well, if we're running with an "Oh no, you stepped on a butterfly! Now the dinosaurs are going to rule the future world!" scenario, or if a Higher Power came and said "Sam and Al are currently busy. We need someone to set right what went wrong", then yeah - she'd throw in with the best of them. But until then, she'd maintain a low profile and minimize her impact on the past the best she could.

 

ASSUMING she got the green light to put right what once went wrong - step one would be a bomb threat to the Pentagon, and to pull the fire alarms on both towers about an half an hour before the first crash. That should be long enough for everyone to exacuate the building, but not long enough to determine that there's no fire and send everyone back in.

 

With the buildings clear, she'd intercept the planes far enough out to deflect their course from impact. She should fly fast enough to catch a jet, and jigging the tail rudder should be easy enough - and some ice into the engine should force a landing without crashing the plane. Then depending if a 250 MPH top speed is fast enough to get to DC (I'm not sure of the distance between the two points), haul ass to the Pentagon and do the same for plane three.

 

Now - the problem comes with the 4th plane. The only reason the passengers revolted was because of the news of what had happened. Without that motivation, the would be no uprising and plane would probably reach its target - and we don't know what that would have been. So hang out in DC, try and spot the plane and force it down - but depending on where it winds up going, she may not be able to react in time.

 

So end result - 3 out of 4 ain't bad.

 

I'm simply pointing that assuming that any intereence would automatically lead to disaster in the "future" (which is her present and someone elses past) isn't any more "intellectually sound" than trying to prevent what, from the character limited perspective seems to be great tragedy. If you start playing the "What if" game too much you talk yourself out of taking any actions at all. I didn't bring up the possibility of changing the future for the worst, I pointed that the character's mere existence is changing the future and that's snowballing over time. If any change is going to lead to disaster, then the world was doomed from tthe moment any of these character's appeared.

 

I've alway wondered why its assumed any alteration in the time stream will end badly. There as much chance of a good things happening or things just evening out over time. Unless you assume that the universe operates by a grand ieffeble plan then there isn't a "right way" for things to turn out or if it does then your actions were probably taken into a account in this grand plan in the first place (or such could be argued).

 

If nothing else this universe seems to be an alternate one anyway so the future impact might indeed be "Somebody elses problem".

 

Like I said, I can see where you're coming from. Its a valid viewpoint for a character to hold, but its not, IMO, the default "right" one for a Hero.

[Guest daeudi_454]

Re: WWYCD: Lost in a world without Supers; 9/11/2001

 

Okay-

This is similiar to a question that was put forth to my players...

 

You find yourself- no powers- in the electronics department of a Sears store, Hollywood Florida, July 27th 1981.

You fully know about the case. You know it led to major legal reform. You know that because of this case- John Walsh will spearhead groups like National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, America's Most Wanted, and more.

You know that the tragedy about to happen will end up saving hundreds, if not thousands of lives from death and misery.

What do you do?

Proudly, every single person gave the same response-

"Screw the timeline." " If I'm there, I have to try to save Adam." "There is no choice, no thought, no regret."

 

EDIT: Some of them did say that they might wait until they figured out who the bastard was that did it, of course.

[Great Beyond]

Re: WWYCD: Lost in a world without Supers; 9/11/2001

 

My point was "The Now" is relative. When you are in a time frame that is now. Once time travel comes into the picture everything becomes relative. If you are concerned with "big picture" you have to think in those terms. After all' date=' from the perspetice of 2001 (in this alternate universe) SHE's the one that doesn't exist yet and is but a possibility. When you change frames of refrence, your understanding has to change. If there is no fate, there is no reason not to try and change things. If things were "meant" to be set then there would be no capabiity to change there and there is no garuntee that any change to the time is going to result in a larger disaster. Making that choice is the burden of power. This scenario gives the character that burden. When 9/11 becomes your NOW then it becomes your problem just as your action in the current NOW are you problem since they impact the future, yours and others. IF the time line can be changed it can be changed for the better or for the worse. Its less a "second chance to roll the dice" but more a reboot. The story doesn't have to end the same, the natural order allows it to be changed so there is no "right" version as that would change from your point of reference.[/quote']

 

 

The problems that we're running into here - at least from real world standpoint - is that we're having to logically discuss a completely illogical field of science. We're both right, and neither of us can rationally explain our point because there is no rationality to time travel.

 

That said - there's no right way to know which way to jump. There could be a Hitler somewhere on the 98th floor who sparks war and disaster and genocide for the next hundred years, or there could be a Gandhi on the 87th floor who leads his people to freedom and begins a golden utopia for the whole of mankind. It's Schrödinger's cat taken to a whole new level.

 

For better or for worse, the die is cast - and to take that kind of responsibility, that it could be Hitler instead of Gandhi - is so far out of GB's league, she couldn’t do it. Don't get me wrong - she'd agonize over the decision, but ultimately she'd keep her hands off.

 

I've alway wondered why its assumed any alteration in the time stream will end badly. There as much chance of a good things happening or things just evening out over time. Unless you assume that the universe operates by a grand ieffeble plan then there isn't a "right way" for things to turn out or if it does then your actions were probably taken into a account in this grand plan in the first place (or such could be argued).

 

I think its mostly because things going horribly wrong - IE, Back to the Future 2, Father's Day from the 05 series of Doctor Who, and so on - happen more often than not because conflict and setting things right make for a more interesting story than "Killing Hitler as a baby brought about a utopia for a thousand years".

 

(Oh, and for the record - when I run/play time travel games, I prefer the standpoint of Rubber time - meaning that the players can change things, interact with the past and have fun with the setting, and the universe wont colapse and when they get home Dinosaurs wont be ruling the world. Basicly - what serves the story I'm trying to tell. If logic and science get in my way, then to hell with them)

 

 

****EDIT***

Ok, another spin for you all -

 

In the Doctor Who episode Genesis of the Daleks, the Doctor is sent back in time by the Time Lords to prevent a future where the Daleks (for those not in the know - one of the most evil, destructive races in the galaxy - think the Borg if they weret a bunch of wussies and if they were bent on extermination instead of assimilation) will eventually conquer the universe. He is to either learn a weakness to exploit against the Daleks, to divert their nature enough to make them less aggressive creatures, or failing all that - prevent their creation.

 

Having exhausted the first two options, the Doctor prepares to wipe the Daleks production facility out. All he has to do is touch two wires together and the Daleks are destroyed. However, the Doctor hesitates - does he have the right to commit genocide? He knows that many future worlds became allies because of their fear of the Daleks, that out of great evil a greater good will come. That if he wipes the Daleks out, he becomes no better than they are.

 

So although the Daleks will create havoc and destruction for millions of years, despite that they will destroy his own people - he doesn't prevent their creation. Does that make him any less a hero?

[nexus]

Re: WWYCD: Lost in a world without Supers; 9/11/2001

 

The problems that we're running into here - at least from real world standpoint - is that we're having to logically discuss a completely illogical field of science. We're both right' date=' and neither of us can rationally explain our point because there is no rationality to time travel.[/font']

 

Oh I agree entirely. There's no real way to debate it "logically" since the subject is inherently illogical. There can't be actual time travel that allows interaction without some form of paradox and major ethical questions. I'm more betting around ideas and different perspective as to -why- someone might make either descion and still be heroic. Both are valid, it depends on the assumptions of the game world which one is "right" and even then its debatable. There isn't really a wrong answer for the characters involved only what they can live with... like pretty much anything else in the life of some one that takes on the inherent moral responsibiity of being a hero.

 

This what makes these "What if" situations interesting.

[Guest daeudi_454]

Re: WWYCD: Lost in a world without Supers; 9/11/2001

 

So although the Daleks will create havoc and destruction for millions of years' date=' despite that they will destroy his own people - he doesn't prevent their creation. Does that make him any less a hero?[/size'][/color][/font]

He made the same lack of a decision in 05's episode Bad Wolf.

 

Less of a hero, debatable.

More of a wuss, definitely.

A totally PC tool for propaganda aginst the death penalty? you betcha!

 

(see also 2006, episode 01- where he decides to punish the PM for destroying alien invaders lethally)

 

[Great Beyond]

Re: WWYCD: Lost in a world without Supers; 9/11/2001

 

Ahoy - discussion of the (as of yet unscreened in the US) Christmas Invasion impending. Avert ye eyes, lest ye be spoiled!

The thing is, both The Doctor and the PM were right - and they were both wrong. What Harriet Jones did was straight up murder, but not mere moments before the Sycorax had proven themselves untrustworthy by trying to kill the Doctor after taking an oath on the blood of their ancestors. To trust them completely to follow up on their word is a naive stance.

It also didn’t help matters any that the Doctor basically scared her into action with the "there are so many races out there" line. So no, I don't think her actions were right - but I do see the justification behind it. Frankly, there is no win-lose here.

[Sundog]

Re: WWYCD: Lost in a world without Supers; 9/11/2001

 

He made the same lack of a decision in 05's episode Bad Wolf.

 

Less of a hero, debatable.

More of a wuss, definitely.

A totally PC tool for propaganda aginst the death penalty? you betcha!

 

(see also 2006, episode 01- where he decides to punish the PM for destroying alien invaders lethally)

 

Maybe. But he's also consistant. He attempts to broker peace in both The Silurians and The Sea Devils, successfully does so between the Earth Empire and Draconians despite the Dalek attempt to scupper it, strives mightily for the lives of the Mutants in the eponymous episode...The Doctor may destroy, but it is never his first choice of action.

 

I say that makes him More of a hero, not less.

[Guest daeudi_454]

Re: WWYCD: Lost in a world without Supers; 9/11/2001

 

Don't get me wrong- I love Doctor Who

 

=================

 

It boils down to that some people believe that a hero is duty bound to fight the evil in front of him, and try to be there to prevent whatever the negative consequences may be....

A hero does not say "This is how it is supposed to happen."

==================

And makes us rather bear those ills we have Than fly to others that we know not of?

Thus conscience does make cowards of us all,

And thus the native hue of resolution Is sicklied o'er with the pale cast of thought, And enterprise of great pitch and moment

With this regard their currents turn awry And lose the name of action.

[David Johnston]

Re: WWYCD: Lost in a world without Supers; 9/11/2001

 

Like I said - big picture. Not stopping the attacks does not necessarily make a character less heroic.

 

Lets use the Titanic as an example - we've got a hundred years of perspective to work from. The sinking of the Titanic meant several major changes in nautical safety: enough lifeboats for EVERY passenger, a uniform policy in distress signal flares, a 24 hour watch on the radio (the California's radio operator went to bed 2 hours before the iceberg hit), standardized distress calls - and it marked a milestone in the end of that big, opulent Rockefeller and JP Morgan lifestyle.

 

Now - lets say your characters is A HERO!!! and stops this tragedy. None of this would happen, or would happen much later (well, except for the Old School Money lifestyle - which was on the way out anyway. This was just the deathblow). So next time instead of 1,523 victims, it could be 3,000 people. Or perhaps it proves that over the top opulence isn't dead, and that lifestyle rolls on through the 20's, preventing the great depression (and having a ripple effect on WWII). Or JJ Astor doesn't die, meaning that he leads his financial empire a few more years - bringing about major impact in the world economy. Suddenly saving 1,500 lives means major alterations to the time line.

 

Same thing here. So you stop the planes and the towers remain standing. The Terrorists, now REALLY honked off at the White Devils try again in a couple of years - but this time they smuggle a nuke into the Superbowl. Instead of just the towers, 10,000 steelers fans and a major city pay the price. How do you feel with yourself now, Hero?

 

 

 

GB wouldnt stop the attacks because she knows she's not wise enough to know which outcome is better, and not arrogant enough to play god like that.

 

Bah. Do you seriously imagine that if terrorists could get a nuke and the wherewithall to smuggle it into Pittsburgh that they'd stop and think "Wait, we already toppled the World Trade Center. I think we've done enough, don't you?". What's more that reasoning applies to every single act of commission or omission. You never know what the long term consequences will be.

 

However I can see why someone would hesitate to tinker with the history of their own world. Even if the result would be better it would still at the least be likely to mess up their own life by eliminating their place in the world, or creating another them who never travelled back in time, or changing their relationship to the people close to them. Doesn't apply though when visiting the an alternate history you have no place in, in the first place.

[Captain Obvious]

Re: WWYCD: Lost in a world without Supers; 9/11/2001

 

Like I said - big picture. Not stopping the attacks does not necessarily make a character less heroic.

 

Lets use the Titanic as an example - we've got a hundred years of perspective to work from. The sinking of the Titanic meant several major changes in nautical safety: enough lifeboats for EVERY passenger, a uniform policy in distress signal flares, a 24 hour watch on the radio (the California's radio operator went to bed 2 hours before the iceberg hit), standardized distress calls - and it marked a milestone in the end of that big, opulent Rockefeller and JP Morgan lifestyle.

 

Now - lets say your characters is A HERO!!! and stops this tragedy. None of this would happen, or would happen much later (well, except for the Old School Money lifestyle - which was on the way out anyway. This was just the deathblow). So next time instead of 1,523 victims, it could be 3,000 people. Or perhaps it proves that over the top opulence isn't dead, and that lifestyle rolls on through the 20's, preventing the great depression (and having a ripple effect on WWII). Or JJ Astor doesn't die, meaning that he leads his financial empire a few more years - bringing about major impact in the world economy. Suddenly saving 1,500 lives means major alterations to the time line.

 

Same thing here. So you stop the planes and the towers remain standing. The Terrorists, now REALLY honked off at the White Devils try again in a couple of years - but this time they smuggle a nuke into the Superbowl. Instead of just the towers, 10,000 steelers fans and a major city pay the price. How do you feel with yourself now, Hero?

 

 

 

GB wouldnt stop the attacks because she knows she's not wise enough to know which outcome is better, and not arrogant enough to play god like that.

 

 

Near misses don't count? I would think that the Titanic sinking without any loss of life, but a full knowledge of how many weak links there were in that chain would encourage quite a lot of reforms. Same for terrorists almost taking over 4 planes and using them as missiles. I don't think that the US would be taking more measures against terrorism if the Pentagon had been hit in a less vacant area, or if Flight 93 had made it to DC. We probably wouldn't be taking any fewer if the passengers on three of the planes had heard about the first one on their cellphones, and they all retook the planes and landed safely.

[HeroGM]

Re: WWYCD: Lost in a world without Supers; 9/11/2001

 

I do not and shall not put 9/11 into anything I run.

[Great Beyond]

Re: WWYCD: Lost in a world without Supers; 9/11/2001

 

It boils down to that some people believe that a hero is duty bound to fight the evil in front of him, and try to be there to prevent whatever the negative consequences may be....A hero does not say "This is how it is supposed to happen."

 

Except unless how it was suppose to happen has a better long term benefit than then short term does. And since the Doctor had insider information, I'll trust his judgment. Besides, he managed to come up with a 4th solution, other than the options the Time Lords gave him. The Daleks constant distraction with Davros - who is now alive in the modified future - kept them from achieving their final destiny.

 

In the case of The Parting of Ways - that was a no win situation for the Doctor. Either way, the human race was dead - either gutted and filleted to be Daleks (those "lucky" enough to survive the process, that is) or dead at the hands of the Doctor. If I were him, if I were going to go, I'd rather not have had the blood of an entire world on my hands.

 

Bah. Do you seriously imagine that if terrorists could get a nuke and the wherewithall to smuggle it into Pittsburgh that they'd stop and think "Wait, we already toppled the WorldTradeCenter. I think we've done enough, don't you?".

 

Well, no, I dont think they'd have stopped. However, I dont think middle east terrorism is in a position to roll a nuke into the superbowl at the moment. But that's mostly a direct response to the attacks. If the plane hijackings hadn't gone down, if various political forces hadn't come into play to deter terrorism, if the world rolled on exactly like it always had been on September 10th, then yes - they'd probably try something again. Heck, Ben Laden had been pretty vocal in his determination to hit the towers again ever since that parking garage bombing didn't do the job the first time - so 9-11 wasn't exactly a surprise to me when it rolled around.

 

So looking at the thinking (from admittedly a very small sample): first attempt = small bomb, second attempt = bigger bomb, third attempt = biggest bomb. I'd figure that the next time out of the gate, Ben Laden would really go over the top.

 

What's more that reasoning applies to every single act of commission or omission. You never know what the long term consequences will be.

 

Again - taking action in the present is a different thing than doing so in the past. To quote a wise muppet, the future is always in motion. Free will when the outcome is not determined is fine. Messing around with the past on the other hand, is a whole 'nother ball game.

[Whitewings]

Re: WWYCD: Lost in a world without Supers; 9/11/2001

 

Bah. Do you seriously imagine that if terrorists could get a nuke and the wherewithall to smuggle it into Pittsburgh that they'd stop and think "Wait, we already toppled the World Trade Center. I think we've done enough, don't you?". What's more that reasoning applies to every single act of commission or omission. You never know what the long term consequences will be.

 

However I can see why someone would hesitate to tinker with the history of their own world. Even if the result would be better it would still at the least be likely to mess up their own life by eliminating their place in the world, or creating another them who never travelled back in time, or changing their relationship to the people close to them. Doesn't apply though when visiting the an alternate history you have no place in, in the first place.

 

Extremists of any stripe are by definition incapable of settling for less than "everything we want and more." If you prevent incident X, than will do *nothing* to prevent incident Y, or to encourage it, other than the effect on a given group's credibility and manpower. In the specific case of the WTC attacks, forcing the planes down and arresting the hijackers, so they can be tried and convicted like common criminals, is the best possible action: It will save many lives, and it will send a clear message to those responsible and others who might be thinking of joining or forming similar groups "You're not soldiers. You're criminals, nothing else." Also, stopping the planes and forcing the authorities to treat the hijackers as criminals, period, will make the "War on Terror" a much harder sell, maybe even impossible.

[Guest daeudi_454]

Re: WWYCD: Lost in a world without Supers; 9/11/2001

 

GB:

What if your character is aware that the actions taken, in fact the character's presence in the universe, means that this is a new, alternate universe? That it became a whole different future the instant the PC arrived?

[Great Beyond]

Re: WWYCD: Lost in a world without Supers; 9/11/2001

 

GB:

What if your character is aware that the actions taken, in fact the character's presence in the universe, means that this is a new, alternate universe? That it became a whole different future the instant the PC arrived?

 

If that were the case - or if she had insider information that stopping the attacks would indeed lead to a better world - then she would go for the gusto certanly. She'd be in New York and DC in a hot second, meddleing with the best of them.

[nexus]

Re: WWYCD: Lost in a world without Supers; 9/11/2001

 

 

Except unless how it was suppose to happen has a better long term benefit than then short term does. And since the Doctor had insider information, I'll trust his judgment. Besides, he managed to come up with a 4th solution, other than the options the Time Lords gave him. The Daleks constant distraction with Davros - who is now alive in the modified future - kept them from achieving their final destiny.

 

In the case of The Parting of Ways - that was a no win situation for the Doctor. Either way, the human race was dead - either gutted and filleted to be Daleks (those "lucky" enough to survive the process, that is) or dead at the hands of the Doctor. If I were him, if I were going to go, I'd rather not have had the blood of an entire world on my hands.

 

You would rather have died knowing you've left billions to suffer the fate of a lingering living death forcibly twisted into a race of souless killing machines that would likely go on to kill untold more beings under the dictactes of an insane being that thought itself a God?

 

The Dr has killed and let people die (Ms Trampoline face or whatever she was. the last "Human" he let her die horribly, for example) so his CAK isn't total.

[TheRavenIs]

Re: WWYCD: Lost in a world without Supers; 9/11/2001

 

GB, this reality isn't the one she came from. The way I posed this: For some reason you find your C on a world that Super’s have never existed. Your C still has the powers, equipment, whatever that makes them a Super. You are alone and if you have any E-D powers that would normally allow you to leave, they don’t work. (this means any trans-dimensional communication is not possible). That also means that time travel isn't possiable.

 

This is the NOW, the future has not been writen, it can't be until either the hero acts or doesn't act. At that point the Hero can't have an effect on a future that hasn't been writen.

 

Tossing that out as the creator of the Question?.

[nexus]

Re: WWYCD: Lost in a world without Supers; 9/11/2001

 

Ahoy - discussion of the (as of yet unscreened in the US) Christmas Invasion impending. Avert ye eyes, lest ye be spoiled!

 

The thing is, both The Doctor and the PM were right - and they were both wrong. What Harriet Jones did was straight up murder, but not mere moments before the Sycorax had proven themselves untrustworthy by trying to kill the Doctor after taking an oath on the blood of their ancestors. To trust them completely to follow up on their word is a naive stance.

It also didn’t help matters any that the Doctor basically scared her into action with the "there are so many races out there" line. So no, I don't think her actions were right - but I do see the justification behind it. Frankly, there is no win-lose here.

 

 

 

At first I thought it was an overreaction, but once I thought it about I saw why she did it and made sense. It was not a "nice" thing to do to, but then again how many times do end up snickering that naieve person that accepts his clearly dishonorable enemies surrender and ends up getting stabbed in the back for his trouble. I'd say it wasn't the nice thing to do by any stretch of the imagination but it was probably the prudent one.

 

 

[Guest daeudi_454]

Re: WWYCD: Lost in a world without Supers; 9/11/2001

 

You are alone and if you have any E-D powers that would normally allow you to leave' date=' they [b']don’t work[/b]. (this means any trans-dimensional communication is not possible). That also means that time travel isn't possible.

yeah... thanks a lot for that.

Quantum Cat says that you are "on his list" .

 

 

 

[TheRavenIs]

Re: WWYCD: Lost in a world without Supers; 9/11/2001

 

yeah... thanks a lot for that.

Quantum Cat says that you are "on his list" .

 

 

 

 

Dude I have a C that has me on he's list. The Traveler, he is a D-Traveler.