Scott Kellog and Richard Johnson, et alii, raise comments on the
damage wrought by plasma and fusion weapons. This is a pet peeve of
mine, as it appears to be very sloppily handled by just about everyone.
In Traveller as I've run it, plasma and fusion guns can, do, and SHOULD
elicit an immediate response from all concerned (PCs and NPCs alike) of
"OH SHIT HE'S GOT A PLASMA GUN! RUN! HIDE! SCREAM! FAINT! DISHONOR YOUR
TROUSERS!" They have been made easier to handle and use in successive
versions of Traveller, to the point where people are now quite cavalier
about handing them out. Which is, of course, bilge.
Having worked with a REAL plasma gun, I have a good feel for what the
man-portable weapons of the future can do. Let's run down the list
in no particular order.....
First off, radiation. There won't be any in a plasma burst; hot
hydrogen is hot hydrogen. The feasability of "containing the reaction
until fusion begins to occur" (as the description of fusion guns goes)
makes me a little queasy, as someone who kicked around going into
Tokamak development and aneutronic fusion but gave the idea up as
being too silly. If there IS appreciable fusion going on in a fusion
gun blast, the weapon becomes several orders of magnitude more
dangerous than a plasma gun, and a prime candidate for ejection from
TDR. I don't allow them in my games and am tempted to simply rule that
they're idiotically impossible. The figures for neutron flux from a
fusion burst are so high that they should be against the Imperial
Rules of War unless one's aim is to stir-fry entire infantry units in
a hurry and leave the gear behind. Recall the Pons and Fleishman
debacle-- one of the first indicators that they had not gotten cold
fusion (a different mechanism but the neutron numbers are Ok to
within two orders of magnitude) to actually work is because the whole
state of Utah should have been rendered lifeless by the neutron blast.
Second, heat. This is THE primary way plasma does damage, because
there's so damn much of it. The blast zone of a plasma gun comes from
the plasma impacting and spattering, which it does with a relatively
isotropic shape (no one direction is strongly favored for spatter
under normal circumstances). Because the metastable conditions for
the plasma state are broken at emission and REALLY broken on impact,
the time of flight being considered small if not negligible with
respect to the relaxation time of the system, the plasma ceases to
be a plasma on impact, and merely becomes a puff of hot hydrogen gas
rather than some mysterious glowing glob of damnation spattering
everywhere. This lack of romantic imagery doesn't change the fact that
as it epxands and cools, that "mere gas cloud" is dangerous as hell.
Third, light and noise. Both will be EXTREME, in a fashion I don't
think anyone fully appreciates. A plasma burst is as bright as the Sun
in apparent magnitude, and looking straight at a PGMP going off should
carry the risk of blindness. The displacement of air by the expanding
hydrogen cloud will produce a truly convincing thunderclap, loud
enough to rupture eardrums. The collateral heat from the plasma stream
will be enough to cook flesh instantly at a range of about 10 cm from
the plasma, so even a near miss will set clothing on fire and cause
horrible burns. What this means is that designing a PGMP or FGMP that
can be used by someone in comabat armor is OK, just barely, but going
beyond that to put them in the hands of individuals without armor at
all is ludicrous. That'd be like firing a flamethrower barehanded,
staring into the Sun with a telescope and firing a howitzer without
ear protection simultaneously several times per minute. No thanks.
Fourth, I feel that I should comment on the fact that no one has ever
addressed the problem of maintainance for such weapons over the long
term. Replacing parts, refurbishing and recharging would require a lot
more support machinery and special skills than slug throwers would.
Does it sound like I don't think much of plasma and fusion guns? Yup.
I can see why they're popular-- they extend the killing ability of
the individual soldier into the realm of battle dress. But to MY mind,
they'll always be squad support weapons for use on the high-tech
battlefield, and someone using one under civilian conditions would be
like seeing a gang member in the streets of LA haul out an M79 and
start firing 40mm grenades at random-- OK for a Schwarzenegger movie
but a bit tough to swallow for reasonable games.
It's much harder to think up reasons why people shouldn't carry around
Gauss versions of the General Electric gatling used in PREDATOR and
TERMINATOR 2, whose official designation escapes me. You could pack
10,000 rounds in a fanny pack and have an ROF capable of chewing up
a building, and a lot less collateral noise flash etc. than a PGMP.
The weapon itself would be light and easy to carry, and VERY deadly.
But then, I've always been a sucker for Vasquez.... |->
- --
Mike Metlay [email removed]
Atomic City [address removed]