tinman

Re: What do you think... A replay opportunity may come about. The PC's have already travelled back in time to fix a problem (and they are living out the new timeline), but they killed the time traveller who helped them (lest the good they did be undone by another - to be fair it was to preempt a successful alien invasion). Since then I have been dropping clues that their current timeline may not be entirely stable. The odd acronym has changed for no reason, certain NPC's have had their reactions to the PC's change suddenly, events that they remember have seemed to have dropped from the public consciousness. I've been working up to potentially having a continuity crisis for them to try to fix, and that might be a chance for them to undo this disaster. If it happens I'll have to make sure it requires a suitable sacrifice on their parts.

Re: What do you think... The tanker has already hit the ground, I'm just trying to poll ideas for the degree and nature of the devastation. Also, there is the redemption issue. From the point of view of both the government and the general public, how does one make up for something like this? How many times will they need to save the world before the slate is wiped clean, so to speak? What will they need to do to get people to trust them again?

Re: What do you think... shucks...

Re: What do you think... Although I love to bask in praise, it is entirely undeserved. I was taken totally off guard by how it went. I actually had to just end the session so that I could take some time to consider the consequences (immediate and otherwise). It's all grist for the mill though...

Re: What do you think... Forced retirement seems a little light...

Re: What do you think... Between them the PC's had the combined might of 60 STR, 40 STR, 70 STR and 35 STR TK. The PC with 60 STR was able to use it to affect an entire object (indirect). The NPC holding the tanker had 120 STR TK and was visibly straining. In the past she had hit them with up to 20d6 worth of Turtle-style smack-down. I can't believe they thought they could hold it up.

Re: What do you think... Considering the political fallout from 9/11 it would probably be safe to say that this event will be at the heart of government policy concerning metahumans for at least the next few decades, and not just in the US.

Re: What do you think... Unless I'm off by a decimal place, that seems about equal to a magnitude 5 earthquake...

Re: What do you think... Actually, it already occurred, but I had to wing it and I'm not sure I got the scale or effects of the devastation right. Essentially the scenario was that a group of metahuman supremacists were staging a protest which included holding the tanker above Manhattan as a means of instilling fear and awe in the "lesser beings". They never intended to actually drop it, merely use it to make a point. When the PC's rushed to intervene a struggle ensued and the telekinetic who was actually holding the tanker got taken out. The PC's had figured that between them they could easily carry it to safety, but they were about two orders of magnitude off in their calculations. It honestly never occurred to me that the PC's would take that route, I figured they would defuse such a hair-trigger situation through diplomacy. As a result I hadn't really put much thought into the outcome if the tanker actually fell.

...the overall effect of a loaded supertanker falling from 2km onto a large city would be? I'm having a hard time wrapping my head around this one. Clearly the impact alone would be tremendous, but what about the oil? There would certainly be enough heat generated to ignite the oil, but would it be dissipated enough by the impact to actually explode or would it simply spread and burn? Secondary fire sources (burst gas mains, flammable buildings, asphalt, etc.) would likely spread the fire well beyond the initial zone of effect, but would a firestorm be likely to develop? What about the downwind effects from that much smoke and particulate? What would be the best way to model this kind of event in HERO terms?

Re: Why does the USS Iowa only have a 10 Defense? edited for lack of sleep

Re: Why does the USS Iowa only have a 10 Defense? Or a "Nuke them all from orbit, and that's how the dinosaurs died out" one...

Re: Why does the USS Iowa only have a 10 Defense? Geez, an Alien infestation in the Cretaceous would make the Chtorran ecosystem look like a good thing...

Re: Why does the USS Iowa only have a 10 Defense? Relax, if we get into too much trouble Tank Boy will save us...

Re: Why does the USS Iowa only have a 10 Defense? Still got that Bradley with the 25mm Bushmaster?

Re: Why does the USS Iowa only have a 10 Defense? But it would have such tiny little arms...

Re: Why does the USS Iowa only have a 10 Defense? Okay, we have to revise our hunting strategies to account for an invisible jumping T-Rex. My new plan: leave the continent, buy an old missile silo, hide. So what would an invisible jumping T-Rex/Alien hybrid be like...

Re: Why does the USS Iowa only have a 10 Defense? But I should imagine that although it could pretty much ignore a man with a .380 pistol, 10 men with .380 SMG's would flay him. If he has 5rPD that can't happen. Of course, no model can be perfect, and the 5rPD does simulate well the T-Rex's huge size and the inconsquential nature of such minor attacks against it. Besides, it needs the extra points for Invisibility...

Re: Why does the USS Iowa only have a 10 Defense? Sounds fair. Or we could drop the resistent defenses entirely and simply go with resistent damage reduction...

Re: Why does the USS Iowa only have a 10 Defense? I'm thinking that 8 resistant defense might be a little high for a T-Rex, after all the USS Iowa only has 10 Maybe 5...

Re: Why does the USS Iowa only have a 10 Defense? Would the head-shot penalty for a T-Rex still be -8? His head is certainly bigger, but the important bits are much smaller. I'd give it a -10. Yeah, I think in a charge situation bigger bullets and a higher rate of fire would be the order of the day. Ugh. Stealthy chameleon T-Rex = Bad bad bad.

Re: Why does the USS Iowa only have a 10 Defense? I'm pretty much in agreement about the armament, but I think I'd prefer to find raised terrain features and glass the countryside, moving from high-open feature to high-open feature in covering teams. I'd probably stay clear of obscuring tree growth so that there'd be less of a risk of surprising the T-Rex at close range. It might also work to set up a blind overlooking water or a recent kill (if a T-Rex actually leaves anything for later). Assuming one could get ahold of a pair of horses, a gun-carriage and a 5-pounder you could even try for a T-Rex in the early season...

Re: Why does the USS Iowa only have a 10 Defense? So let's go with the premise that you are actually hunting a T-Rex for sport, how would you go about it (weapon of choice, tactic, etc.). First we'd have to address the habitat issue. I don't know much about the latest theories on how T-Rex's lived, but it would likely be a safe bet that if they existed today they would keep to edge habitat (trees to hide their outline, open areas to run down their prey) rather than plains or heavy brush. For purposes of being sporting about it we would rule out the use of AFV's and helicopter gunships, or really moving vehicles of any kind (no chance to make a clean and humane kill from a moving vehicle). So it's you and a couple of buddies, on foot and loaded for T-Rex. What's the plan?

Re: Why does the USS Iowa only have a 10 Defense? The human body is very resilient when it comes to things like "hydrostatic shock" and temporary wound cavities. The only part of the body where this is really a factor is inside the skull, and if your bullet is already inside the skull the rest is pretty much gravy. edit: sorry for the imagery The key factors in bullet "stopping power" are whether or not the CNS is hit and how much tissue is destroyed in areas likely to cause a massive loss of blood pressure.

Re: Why does the USS Iowa only have a 10 Defense? An AR10 would do nicely as well. And maybe something in 10-gauge "for close encounters".