11-04-2015, 08:16 PM | #41 |
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: The plutonium rich regions of Washington State
|
Re: Questions about UT smoke, lasers, and plasma.
Yeah, but now you need to deal with the fact that the person now has a channel of several hundred or more atmospheres of ionized plasma in him pushing out in all directions. This exceeds the material strength of meat and gristle and bone by a large margin. You end up with a messy splat. Admittedly, the diameter of the messy splat depends on the initial diameter of the channel, so a needle-thin beam might only blow out a cm or so wound channel - but how are you going to get your plasma down a needle-thin channel anyway?
Luke |
11-05-2015, 07:02 AM | #42 | |
Join Date: Aug 2007
|
Re: Questions about UT smoke, lasers, and plasma.
Quote:
In the end the difference between absorption, reflection and refraction is only going to be a matter of degree. Things that absorb the laser light will heat up and be destroyed first, then the reflectors because they can't reflect the light perfectly and absorb some of the energy in the process. The refractors come last but they aren't perfect either and each tiny microrefractor will eventually pick up enough energy in the process to exceed its' miniscule capacity to absorb the laser light too. All these particles are suspended in the air too and you're exploding the air out of your way because you have to use a frequency of laser light that air absorbs well. The smoke particles wil get blown out of the way too.
__________________
Fred Brackin |
|
11-05-2015, 07:25 AM | #43 | |
Join Date: Aug 2007
|
Re: Questions about UT smoke, lasers, and plasma.
Quote:
Also on p.160 Prism Smoke is explicitly noted as being ineffective v. X-ray Lasers. Your main problem may be that you're trying to create a new rule about existing equipment and you don't seem to be the GM. The GM could do it on nothing but his arbitrary authority but if you're not the GM you can't quote the rules as telling GMs to do this. If SJGames wanted smoke to stop Plasma guns it would say so in the book. However, my main recommendation is that if somebody else is GM that you don't argue with your GM as much as you've tried to argue your point here. It'll just drag the game to a halt.
__________________
Fred Brackin |
|
11-05-2015, 07:44 AM | #44 | |
Join Date: Mar 2015
|
Re: Questions about UT smoke, lasers, and plasma.
Quote:
Besides that, the x-ray and gamma lasers don't describe why they are unaffected by smoke, it could be that they ignore it like many other lasers do for clear air. In which case the plasma bolt would explode on contact with the smoke. Now from this thread I don't think that is the case, I think its just that the description is irreconcilable with anything else in UT or real science. |
|
11-05-2015, 07:48 AM | #45 | |
Join Date: Apr 2010
|
Re: Questions about UT smoke, lasers, and plasma.
Quote:
You want plasma weapons to be differentiated from laser weapons--to have a different feel. With my suggested solution you get that. Laser weapons simply peter out in smoke. Plasma weapons by contrast penetrate the smoke for some distance and then explode. That has a certain cool factor, no? |
|
11-05-2015, 07:57 AM | #46 | |
Join Date: Aug 2007
|
Re: Questions about UT smoke, lasers, and plasma.
Quote:
__________________
Fred Brackin |
|
11-05-2015, 08:06 AM | #47 | |
Join Date: Mar 2015
|
Re: Questions about UT smoke, lasers, and plasma.
Quote:
*EDIT: whoops I got you and Anaraxes post confused. A mix of the 2 solutions! **EDIT: because they are actually right along the same lines. Last edited by sethbrayman; 11-05-2015 at 09:31 AM. |
|
11-05-2015, 08:07 AM | #48 |
Join Date: Nov 2013
|
Re: Questions about UT smoke, lasers, and plasma.
Definitely don't worry about smoke.
...unless it's magical, pixie-dust, mana empowered smoke! |
11-05-2015, 08:28 AM | #49 | |
Join Date: Mar 2015
|
Re: Questions about UT smoke, lasers, and plasma.
Quote:
Heh, by definitely I mean backed up by clear use of UT rules or even UT rules and real world science! Unfortunately it doesn't seem like that will be possible, the UT description of the plasma weapon and the UT description of what smoke does, along with how lasers and smoke really work doesn't seem to jive together. I guess that's just SS right... |
|
11-05-2015, 09:36 AM | #50 | |
Join Date: Jul 2008
|
Re: Questions about UT smoke, lasers, and plasma.
Quote:
The part that's really inconsistent is that the front-runner laser punches through air and smoke but not through walls or people. That's most likely because the laser is strictly a (inadequate) excuse for the thing.
__________________
I don't know any 3e, so there is no chance that I am talking about 3e rules by accident. |
|
Tags |
laser, plasma weapons, ultra-tech |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|