Re: Re: Starships and Lifepods

From: Bo <lorgryt_at_...>
Date: Wed, 07 Dec 2011 08:31:01 -0800

Two things on this one: First, I get that the issue I keep missing is simulating a good book/movie/show not a real event. Roger that! And second, and this one is a big one, why don't these really interesting keywords end up on the list or a web page somewhere? I realize you came up with these on-the-fly, but damn that would be useful to have list to look over and get a feel for the concepts others have used! LOL

Thanks, Jeff.

On 12/7/2011 1:27 AM, Jeff wrote:
>
> > Right, I get that. But where I have a problem is physics. Reality is a
> > b*tch. The energy of a .22 Long Rifle and 7.62mm NATO round are very
> > different at 100 feet. But, the weapon firing them is identical (both
> > are M14s in different calibers). The .22 will not kill the cow, the
> 7.62
> > will. There is a difference.
>
> For most stories, it really doesn't matter if James Bond is using a
> .22 or a 9mm - a gun is a gun is a gun. Dirty Harry has his "Big Gun
> that will blow your head clean off" as an ability, but it kills no
> differently than William Munny using his "Lucky when it comes to
> killing" ability (a breakout ability from his Murderin' Gunfighter
> keyword).
>
> But if Dirty Harry says he wants to use his Big Gun to stop a car (by
> shooting it in the Engine Block), he can. For William Munny, it
> doesn't pass the credibility test.
>
> Beyond that, I rarely see any more distinction between firearms being
> made in stories or films. Jane has "Vera" which can shoot through
> walls, but it is no better in a regular firefight than Mal's "Quick
> Shot" ability.
>
> Jeff
>