06-21-2016, 02:55 PM | #31 | ||
Join Date: Dec 2007
|
Re: Capebusters -- brainstorming a single-setting game
Quote:
Quote:
As to this, what a nation like the United States could do is reinstate draft registration broadening it to include women, define anyone using paranomal powers to commit violence without governmental remit as a "terrorist" and send hit squads and drone strikes out to foreign countries to eliminate paranormal draft evaders on the grounds that they are suspected of being one of Varuna's terrorists. All quite constitutional, given that the United States regards itself as being at war. I have no idea what the U.N. treaty is for. |
||
06-21-2016, 03:24 PM | #32 | |
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Vermont
|
Re: Capebusters -- brainstorming a single-setting game
Quote:
__________________
My ongoing thread of GURPS versions of DC Comics characters. |
|
06-22-2016, 02:35 AM | #33 | |
GURPS FAQ Keeper
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Kyïv, Ukraine
|
Re: Capebusters -- brainstorming a single-setting game
Quote:
|
|
06-22-2016, 08:43 AM | #34 | ||
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Denver, Colorado
|
Re: Capebusters -- brainstorming a single-setting game
I'm only going by what we saw, and the movie didn't even mention necessary ratification by the U.S. Senate. The terms aren't even discussed, really -- all I'm talking about is the process of passage and implementation.
Was it a simplification for the sake of the movie? Almost certainly. Is it necessary to simplify in such a way for a game? Not at all. Quote:
Quote:
As for being targeted just because they flee the country and refuse to register, that's a pretty steep slippery slope. The thing to remember is that, in most democratic societies, everyone should receive the equal protection of the law, and that includes accused criminals. In fact, large portions of the laws in such societies are devoted to how to balance the rights of criminals with the need to protect the public, because law enforcers throughout history have been used to suppress anybody disliked by those who benefit from the status quo. The sudden emergence of those with superpowers threaten the status quo, no matter what. Moreover, the potential for surreal violence makes it absolutely necessary to create a rapid-response team. The real question is, what would be the limits of the power exercised by that team? Remember, limits result in conflict, and conflict drives stories. Tony Stark made the point that the exercise of power, without limit, inevitably results in harm to others. Steve Rogers made the excellent counter-point that those who control those with power have even more power, themselves, and who watches the watchmen? Any GM who runs a campaign in which characters of extraordinary abilities operate as law enforcement, in something that resembles the modern world, needs to think through those issues.
__________________
-- MXLP:9 [JD=1, DK=1, DM-M=1, M(FAW)=1, SS=2, Nym=1 (nose coffee), sj=1 (nose cocoa), Maz=1] "Some days, I just don't know what to think." -Daryl Dixon. |
||
06-22-2016, 10:16 AM | #35 | ||
Join Date: Dec 2007
|
Re: Capebusters -- brainstorming a single-setting game
Quote:
But this treaty in the game setting has nothing to do with that. At a guess from the title and the campaign premise it would be a blanket condemnation of paranormals using their powers against other people, or in any way that might pose a threat to human safety without the let of the duly constituted authorities, and authorizing the creation of a joint task force whose job would be to cross borders (presumably with the permission and at the request of the relevant national government) and hunt down the paranormals who defy that. Presumably those who survive being hunted would be turned over to local authorities for imprisonment, forced service or execution if they want them. Quote:
Last edited by David Johnston2; 06-22-2016 at 11:12 AM. |
||
06-22-2016, 10:52 AM | #36 | |
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Lawrence, KS
|
Re: Capebusters -- brainstorming a single-setting game
Quote:
__________________
Bill Stoddard I don't think we're in Oz any more. |
|
06-22-2016, 11:11 AM | #37 | |
Join Date: Dec 2007
|
Re: Capebusters -- brainstorming a single-setting game
Quote:
|
|
06-22-2016, 11:14 AM | #38 |
Join Date: Feb 2011
|
Re: Capebusters -- brainstorming a single-setting game
What I'm getting here is that perhaps the events of 2018 are insufficient, but a big enough disaster will allow anything.
Perhaps they actually do gain control of the missiles? Perhaps they accidentally/intentionally launch one or several? A megadeath or two goes a long way to justifying international police powers. |
06-22-2016, 11:26 AM | #39 | |
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Lawrence, KS
|
Re: Capebusters -- brainstorming a single-setting game
Quote:
Moreover, the people who were locked up were taken into custody by the official Avengers, the ones who had signed the Accords: Tony Stark, James Rhodes, Natasha Romanoff (though she bailed out), and the Vision. The fact that Ross accepted custody of the other four, and didn't put Tony or Rhodey or the Vision under arrest for unauthorized use of superpowers, makes it clear that he accepted what they were doing as an authorized action of the Avengers, even if he did so after the fact. And the only agency that could authorize the Avengers to do anything was whatever agency the Accords set up. (The other two members of Tony's team are more problematic. T'challa could probably deal with any questions about his involvement by claiming diplomatic immunity. But Tony might end up having to decide whether to turn a high school kid over to "Thunderbolt" Ross. On the other hand, Tony seems to be getting away with it for the moment. And if one thing is clear from the whole MCU, it's that Tony doesn't think things through carefully!)
__________________
Bill Stoddard I don't think we're in Oz any more. |
|
06-22-2016, 12:01 PM | #40 |
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: One Mile Up
|
Re: Capebusters -- brainstorming a single-setting game
|
Tags |
horror, supers |
|
|