Steve Jackson Games - Site Navigation
Home General Info Follow Us Search Illuminator Store Forums What's New Other Games Ogre GURPS Munchkin Our Games: Home

Go Back   Steve Jackson Games Forums > Roleplaying > GURPS

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 12-03-2015, 08:48 PM   #21
Joseph Paul
Custom User Title
 
Joseph Paul's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Indianapolis, IN
Default Re: Do Antiparticle Beams Inflict Rad Damage?

The AM warhead's rad damage is linked to the mass of the antimatter. The pulsar produces radiation when the anti-particles annihilate just as the AM warhead does. So the pulsar's rad damage should vary by the mass of the anti-particles. I think the question needs to be asked - what is the relationship between .1 micrograms/6DX4 burning ex surge and X mass/6DX4 crush ex surge?
__________________
Joseph Paul
Joseph Paul is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-04-2015, 06:11 PM   #22
Ragabash Moon
 
Ragabash Moon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Topeka, Kansas
Default Re: Do Antiparticle Beams Inflict Rad Damage?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joseph Paul View Post
The AM warhead's rad damage is linked to the mass of the antimatter. The pulsar produces radiation when the anti-particles annihilate just as the AM warhead does. So the pulsar's rad damage should vary by the mass of the anti-particles. I think the question needs to be asked - what is the relationship between .1 micrograms/6DX4 burning ex surge and X mass/6DX4 crush ex surge?
Uh what? It would use the same rules as an attack. Same as it does with CR and EX.. What kind of complication are you trying to suggest?
__________________

Cleopatra: Whenever she assigned me to the switch, was that Voice, or was Raina influencing her thinking? Because, I mean, if it was Raina, she got inside my head and decided that I would screw it up.
Ragabash Moon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-04-2015, 10:57 PM   #23
Joseph Paul
Custom User Title
 
Joseph Paul's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Indianapolis, IN
Default Re: Do Antiparticle Beams Inflict Rad Damage?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ragabash Moon View Post
Uh what? It would use the same rules as an attack. Same as it does with CR and EX.. What kind of complication are you trying to suggest?
tl;dr version - AM interactions are messed up and there is no reason to not do it any way you feel like. That said:

Well AM in UT seems to be getting different treatments.

As a lab accident it is 6dx9 cr ex for a microgram UT pp80-81.

As a warhead a microgram does 6dx12 burn ex sur and has a linked tox rad attack 6dx 100,000 rads that falls of as the square of the distance from the explosion.

At .1 microgram the warhead is 6dx4 burn ex sur with a tox rad 6dx 10,000 rad attack UT p 157 which I will use for comparison later.

As an antiparticle beam from a semi portable pulsar it is 6dx4(3) cr ex rad sur

So there seems to be some variability in how AM going boom is modeled in UT. I think there is enough variability in the descriptions of the three instances of AM being destructive that you could write your own ticket for it.

Questions I have - why is AM as a warhead burn ex sur with a linked tox rad (rolled as separate not innate damage) and from a (failed) trap it is cr ex (no rad OR sur)? They are essentially the same thing.

Why does a microgram of AM in a warhead produce a greater amount of damage (even if it is burn?) compared to a release of a microgram of AM in a lab? 6dx12 vs 6dx9.

Why no cr ex for a warhead of AM?

Why no burn for the pulsar? The other charged particle weapons seem to do so and the AM warhead does.

Is the pulsar's cr damage from the speed of impact of the antiparticles or the cratering they do to the target when they interact with terrene matter? If it is the impact speed than I can see that it is an infinitesimal amount of AM that is being projected and the tiny amount of rad damage that results would be in line with the pulsar description. However the other charged particle blaster is supposed to be a near light speed weapon as well and it produces burn damage rather than cr. Why?

On the other hand we don't know how large an amount of AM is being projected by the pulsar. If the damage is mostly from the AM annihilating with terrene matter does that mean that the 6dx4 semi-portable pulsar is throwing close to a tenth of a microgram of antiparticles and there is no reason to not rewrite the rad damage to be larger?

I am pretty sure that some of the real world answers lie in the saying - "speed kills" - but there is still something a little rough in these different applications of AM.
__________________
Joseph Paul
Joseph Paul is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-04-2015, 11:26 PM   #24
Flyndaran
Untagged
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Forest Grove, Beaverton, Oregon
Default Re: Do Antiparticle Beams Inflict Rad Damage?

I would not only expect, but demand, purpose built warheads to result in more damage than lab accidental explosions.

Also I think radiation damage would be negated/lessened by atmosphere as it absorbs and turns it into a heat/shock wave.
But don't quote me on that as I'm a barely educated layman.
__________________
Beware, poor communication skills. No offense intended. If offended, it just means that I failed my writing skill check.
Flyndaran is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2015, 12:24 AM   #25
Ulzgoroth
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Default Re: Do Antiparticle Beams Inflict Rad Damage?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joseph Paul View Post
Is the pulsar's cr damage from the speed of impact of the antiparticles or the cratering they do to the target when they interact with terrene matter? If it is the impact speed than I can see that it is an infinitesimal amount of AM that is being projected and the tiny amount of rad damage that results would be in line with the pulsar description. However the other charged particle blaster is supposed to be a near light speed weapon as well and it produces burn damage rather than cr. Why?
While I don't think the Cr rather than Burn makes sense, it's Cr Ex, not just Cr. Which is basically a whole different thing.
__________________
I don't know any 3e, so there is no chance that I am talking about 3e rules by accident.
Ulzgoroth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2015, 02:47 AM   #26
Anthony
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Berkeley, CA
Default Re: Do Antiparticle Beams Inflict Rad Damage?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flyndaran View Post
Also I think radiation damage would be negated/lessened by atmosphere as it absorbs and turns it into a heat/shock wave.
Realistically, antimatter is a really cruddy way to deliver blast effects on a scale smaller than nuclear weapons, and a great way to kill people with radiation. That's because the vast majority of the energy release from antimatter annihilation is in the form of penetrating radiation, and at small enough scales the energy is too diffuse to produce a shockwave at all.
__________________
My GURPS site and Blog.
Anthony is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2015, 01:44 PM   #27
Fred Brackin
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Default Re: Do Antiparticle Beams Inflict Rad Damage?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flyndaran View Post
Also I think radiation damage would be negated/lessened by atmosphere as it absorbs and turns it into a heat/shock wave.
But don't quote me on that as I'm a barely educated layman.
As Anthony hints at, atmospheric absorption of the relevant gamma rays happens at about 750 yards on average.. when that ionizes enough of a percentage of the atmosphere to that distance you get a relatively conventional blast wave. Obviously in the heavy strategic AM bomb class.
__________________
Fred Brackin
Fred Brackin is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2015, 04:20 PM   #28
Anthony
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Berkeley, CA
Default Re: Do Antiparticle Beams Inflict Rad Damage?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fred Brackin View Post
As Anthony hints at, atmospheric absorption of the relevant gamma rays happens at about 750 yards on average.. when that ionizes enough of a percentage of the atmosphere to that distance you get a relatively conventional blast wave. Obviously in the heavy strategic AM bomb class.
Of course, that corresponds to going through only a couple feet of soil, so vaporize enough of that and you'll get a blast at a significantly smaller scale than is needed for an atmospheric fireball. Of course, it will be ground level and probably channeled upwards by the crater, so horribly inefficient unless you can arrange to hit a massive above-ground object.
__________________
My GURPS site and Blog.
Anthony is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2015, 06:46 PM   #29
lwcamp
 
lwcamp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: The plutonium rich regions of Washington State
Default Re: Do Antiparticle Beams Inflict Rad Damage?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anthony View Post
Realistically, antimatter is a really cruddy way to deliver blast effects on a scale smaller than nuclear weapons, and a great way to kill people with radiation. That's because the vast majority of the energy release from antimatter annihilation is in the form of penetrating radiation, and at small enough scales the energy is too diffuse to produce a shockwave at all.
If you annihilate antiprotons on heavy nuclei, you can get much of the energy going into the nucleus to fragment it into various high energy bits (primarily by nuclear capture of the annihilation pions that are created right on the surface of the nucleus). The resulting nuclear fragments dump their energy quickly into any surrounding matter, resulting in localized heating. Sure, it leaves a radioactive mess, and you do get plenty of penetrating radiation from the pions moving away from the target nucleus, but you also get a fireball.

Luke
lwcamp is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
antiparticle beams, radiation, surge, ultra-tech, weapons

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Fnords are Off
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:10 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.