Alchemical Solutions [Worm/Exalted] Thread 6: Fatal Fires Flagrantly Fry Frantic Friends, Family

Stormseed said:
The name Demon Fork makes me think 'Dark Armsmaster.'



What was the purpose of the crabs, anyhow?
Underwater combat force, underwater sensor network, emergency swimming aid, emergency food supply. Without the crabs Behemoth would have nailed us good with surprise. I hope some of them survived in the bay.
 
veekie said:
Underwater combat force, underwater sensor network, emergency swimming aid, emergency food supply. Without the crabs Behemoth would have nailed us good with surprise. I hope some of them survived in the bay.
Any survivors need to get uplifted. I have a mental image of a bunch of giant crabs scuttling around the beach with top hats and monacles.
 
uju32 said:
We have been constantly using bug clones all through this fight.
And now that our armor is down and we're sporting more serious injuries, we won't exactly be zipping around, which means most of our interaction will be via clone.
And yes, we'll buy every dot of Socialize when it's available, but the next level is not going to be trained for at least another four turns, and we need more Socialize now.
Yep. Pretty much anything that reinforces what we do with our swarm is XP well spent since that's a core part of what we're good at.
Stray thought:
If we'd thought to buy Presence(Intimidation) last turn, we might have been able to get Noelle to back down.
And that might have saved the lives of Penitent and Jotun, as well as Noelle's.
As satisfying as it would be to engage in a bit of "I told you so's" I'm not going to do that. Noelle's motivation at that point was probably something along the lines of' "EAT GROW DESTROY" so trying to get her to stand down on that front would have been really difficult. Then again, oWoD so I have no idea if that even matters. I'll have to check later. At least our App 5 should have helped (unless Noelle was App 0, I'll have to check on how that works. [edit: no change, that I can tell. You're just grotesque.])

1 more die might have made the difference, but I don't think it would have been that likely.


Crunch follows:
Assuming optimal conditions and everybody running on Exalted social combat we'd have a pool of (Manip 2 + Presence 3 + Intimidate 1 + Conviction 4 + Stunt 3 + Wound Penalty -2) 11 dice. Which ain't bad. We could also have attacked an intimacy she had for a -1 to her MDV (appealing to the human element trapped inside), and we'd apply the maximum -3 penalty for having App 5 vs App 0, for a total -4 penalty to Noelle's MDV. Given what I said about her Motivation, the +3 bonus knocks that down to a final penalty of -1 MDV.

If Noelle is using Exalted (as a denizen of Earth Bet, we'll just say her Essence = N/A = 0) for her social defense - her dodge MDV could be anywhere from 2 (WP 5, Integrity 0) to 7 (WP 10, Integrity 5). Factor in the penalty and she'd have a MDDV of 1 to 6. That's...doable. But she could just spend WP to ignore it, which is probably what happened anyway.

If Noelle is using oWoD rules for social defense - then she doesn't have a static defense, she has to roll her WP (diff 6) to resist. Which means she could be rolling from 5 to 10 dice, about half of which would be successes on average. Here's where it becomes guesswork - assuming that the way things work when Essence beings interact with Earth-Bet it's a case of, "OK, you'll do your thing and then we'll do mine" it means that she'd have the equivalent of a (post-penalty) MDDV of 1 to 4 on average. Interestingly enough, under oWoD while she could spend a WP to add a success to that WP roll she couldn't use it to resist our argument if we'd beaten her. At least, that's the case as far as I could tell.
 
The capes that actually mattered to me seem to already be dead or on their way to being dead. Basically this choice for me is to shape Taylor's personality, which imo is far for important than some lives I hardly care about.
 
That could cut both ways scope. Our actions have consequences, and the fact is that saving a few capes saves MORE civilian lives in the long run. There are still plenty of heavy hitters alive, and we are going to NEED them in the long run. As far as shaping Taylor's personality goes, this is a war for survival. Taylor needs to be able to make hard decisions when necessary, and she has to be able to make the most intelligent and productive choice. The fact is that we would only be able to save a handful of people, and you are implying that saving a handful that can actually help us is somehow morally wrong. What would be morally wrong would be to allow people to die who have the best odds of saving others in the long run and possibly avenge those who have died, so that you can save someone who can't do any of those things just so you can pat yourself on the back and call yourself a good person.

Please don't think I'm saying this to be insulting, because I'm NOT. This kind of arithmetic is cold and can be easily dehumanizing if we aren't careful. Your decision is a natural human response, but remember that Capes are humans too or you risk dehumanizing them. Read Lordsfire's post carefully. Making a moral choice and making a tactical choice are not mutually exclusive.
 
.IronSun. said:
That could cut both ways scope. Our actions have consequences, and the fact is that saving a few capes saves MORE civilian lives in the long run. There are still plenty of heavy hitters alive, and we are going to NEED them in the long run. As far as shaping Taylor's personality goes, this is a war for survival. Taylor needs to be able to make hard decisions when necessary, and she has to be able to make the most intelligent and productive choice. The fact is that we would only be able to save a handful of people, and you are implying that saving a handful that can actually help us is somehow morally wrong. What would be morally wrong would be to allow people to die who have the best odds of saving others in the long run and possibly avenge those who have died, so that you can save someone who can't do any of those things just so you can pat yourself on the back and call yourself a good person.

Please don't think I'm saying this to be insulting, because I'm NOT. This kind of arithmetic is cold and can be easily dehumanizing if we aren't careful. Your decision is a natural human response, but remember that Capes are humans too or you risk dehumanizing them. Read Lordsfire's post carefully. Making a moral choice and making a tactical choice are not mutually exclusive.
I don't care about the lives of others at this point. I care about Taylor's mental health.
 
LordsFire said:
Hence my post, considering the post Gromweld made (look at the top of mine to see what he said).

There's a decision being forced here, and frankly, given the limited information Taylor has (and us by extension), I'd say it's better to have tried to save everyone (capes and non), than to have either gotten more people killed by letting critical capes get cut down, or devaluing 'common' human life by simply treating capes as more valuable.

Grom said thread chatter shapes things somewhat, so I'm trying to contribute to that shaping.
At the very least, I appreciate the time you spent giving such a thorough examination of priorities and the reasoning behind said priorities.

So, since I think what your wrote merits more than just a simple like, allow me to add:

Well said, sir.
 
scope said:
I don't care about the lives of others at this point. I care about Taylor's mental health.
So do I. The fact is that we are NOT going to be able to save enough lives, there WILL be people who will die and there is nothing at all we can do to stop that. If she saves downed capes then the lives she saves will be more important, not because capes are inherently better, but because they are more EFFECTIVE in this kind of situation. You will notice that neither of us are even considering the save yourself option, that's good. Saving people who would die without our intervention is the morally the RIGHT thing to do, and the fact that she saved as many people as she could will help Taylor a lot when that high Clarity wears off and the grieving sets in. So long as live are getting saved it doesn't matter morally WHICH lives are being saved. Looked at in a slightly more abstract sense, since saving capes would in the long run save MORE lives, you could even make the case that since saving capes saves more lives than saving regular people it is in fact more morally right than saving people who can't help.



I think we agree on the same general concept, but are disagreeing on the particulars.
 
LordsFire's post is useful, and is a great description of the "Save The Capes" Attitude - I'll probably steal some of this post for use in-story if that vote wins. There is similar logical, methodical rationale for the other two choices, however, so don't be afraid that one is the "Bad Choice."

In fact, it's probably worth mentioning now that this entire Arc has yet to have a "Bad Choice." I've purposefully been treating each option as a viable path that would produce good results for the whole fight, and even before I don't believe I have ever offered an option that would deliberately screw you guys over - you are Exalted, so Winning is in your nature. Just HOW you Win is what's being chosen here.

'Win' is a relative term in the Worm Universe, of course, but will become more in line with the Exalted 'Win At Everything' the more you saturate the place with Essence.

Finally, it will be evident in the story when the opportunity to build a Vat or gain access to a Vat is on the horizon. I know people will want to save up XP for the event, so I'm not just going to spring it on you folk - you don't have to worry about conserving ALL your XP right now, but slowly building a 'bank' now might be a worthwhile endeavor. If you want, you can even specifically set aside XP for future Vat use by treating it as an XP vote:

[ ] 2 XP - Vat Bank
 
Zechstein said:
That's not the point. Presumably, if we decide for the "Save the People" option, we will try to maximize the number of survivors in total, while the "Save the Capes" option maximizes the number of surviving capes. Since there are a lot more humans than parahumans in town, the latter option means fewer survivors in total, i.e. letting people die so that other, more "important" people can be saved.

If you do this then you basically admit that powers make your life more valuable that that of other people. If you fall into that trap it is just one step further to a two-tiered society, to cape feudalism and other drivel. If we want a society where all people are equal we have to treat everyone equally, and that means we should prioritize saving the greatest number of people, not the most "valuable."

And about "saving the people who will safe the people": We are given the choice of saving "capes," not "heroes" or "healers" but capes. That means we will be saving the villains, too, so that they can continue their murderous ways.
Except that the sad truth is that this is actually the case. Alexandria is more important than some random person on the street. So is Tattletale if she's willing to turn on Coil now that she has the opportunity to come clean and reveal all his secrets. So is Panacea if she can get her head back together.

These are just a few examples, but the point should be readily apparent - if a cape can help contribute to taking down the Endbringers, that cape is more valuable than hundred, thousands, or even tens of thousands of civilian lives. Stopping the Endbringers (which is a distinct possibility once we've had enough time to build up our forces) is very much within the realm of what we can accomplish and will save millions of lives.
 
FunkyEntropy said:
Except that the sad truth is that this is actually the case. Alexandria is more important than some random person on the street. So is Tattletale if she's willing to turn on Coil now that she has the opportunity to come clean and reveal all his secrets. So is Panacea if she can get her head back together.

These are just a few examples, but the point should be readily apparent - if a cape can help contribute to taking down the Endbringers, that cape is more valuable than hundred, thousands, or even tens of thousands of civilian lives. Stopping the Endbringers (which is a distinct possibility once we've had enough time to build up our forces) is very much within the realm of what we can accomplish and will save millions of lives.
Don't forget that all capes started off normal, you never know if one of those useless civilians will trigger with a power more useful against an Endbringer.
 
@zechstein:

Taylor being Taylor, I am of course assuming she would be using roughly the same logic as what Lordsfire posted. Meaning, she will be maximizing the amount of people she can save regardless, and the only difference between the two options we are debating would be what type of individual we are focusing our efforts towards, and she would likely be giving medics a higher priority and known villains a lower priority regardless. Grom didn't say something like 'Save twelve capes or thirty civilians.' That would be morally soul crushing, and while I would probably still vote to save the capes I wouldn't be able to argue for it on moral grounds and I'd probably hate my self for it a little bit.

Thankfully, Grom abstained from making it a moral choice, so from the information he's given us I feel that either choice is morally sound, and we should therefore focus on the most tactically efficient option.

On a side note I'll say that I find it encouraging that absolutely NOONE is apparently even considering the save yourself option. We might save the world yet!
 
scope said:
Don't forget that all capes started off normal, you never know if one of those useless civilians will trigger with a power more useful against an Endbringer.
Honestly, that's reaching a bit. You're basically saying we should let confirmed valuable capes die on the off chance the the few normals we save instead MIGHT trigger an ability that MIGHT help us later on down the road. That's called gambling, and this one in particular is very high risk with low rewards. Again, we are going to save an equal amount of lives regardless, and in my view not making those lives count as much as possible would be irresponsible.
 
.IronSun. said:
Honestly, that's reaching a bit. You're basically saying we should let confirmed valuable capes die on the off chance the the few normals we save instead MIGHT trigger an ability that MIGHT help us later on down the road. That's called gambling, and this one in particular is very high risk with low rewards. Again, we are going to save an equal amount of lives regardless, and in my view not making those lives count as much as possible would be irresponsible.
When some one says tens of thousands of lives does not even match up to the life of one cape, I hardly find that fair. Where does it stop? Are they more valuable than an entire nation?
 
Back
Top