So Dr. Destroyer walks into the UN...

[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]

Backroom deals

 

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]

Re: So Dr. Destroyer walks into the UN...

 

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]

So Dr. Destroyer has superoir technology?

 

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