View Single Post
  #29  
Old 04-15-2018, 03:36 PM
The Dark The Dark is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Posts: 275
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Enfield View Post
I actually think that having recovery possibilities does make it more intresting. Because in most zombie or infected movies you do know after a bit how long infection spreads. In the original George A. Romero series it might take hours or days for a person to eventually die and become a zombie, whereas dying quicklyl from blood loss or shock would result in immediate turning. The Walking dead works on a similar logic. Whereas in 28 Days Later and similar franchises (or The Crossed series) infection spreads within minutes if not seconds in some cases. It is inevitable.

However this means that you automatically know what to do and have no moral dilemmas. I think it's more interesting to have those. It also requires effort--you might have to keep someone on observation, run successive tests, etc.
Yes, this was the gist of what I was thinking (but couldn't put into words) when I kept in the potential for recovery. It creates a much more interesting (to me, at least) moral dilemma to know that while the zombie will probably die anyway, there's a possibility of recovery. Another area to think about is how they react to less-than-lethal defenses - how much does CS discourage a zombie horde? What about beanbag rounds or tasers? (For a potentially more light-hearted take, can you distract them with hamburgers?)

Quote:
Originally Posted by swaghauler
The only issue I have with it is GDW's unrealistic/inaccurate depiction of disease treatment. This is the same issue GDW had with fuel (considering Methanol a viable liquid fuel and using AvGas for jets). GDW fails to fully and distinctly describe the diseases in their books and it will often result in an incorrect prescribed treatment. That major failure being the LACK OF DISTINCTION between a BACTERIAL DISEASE and a VIRAL DISEASE. Why is this distinction so important? Because NO antibiotic made will work on a Virus. Viruses are also MUCH SMALLER than Bacteria and can be missed by water and air filters because of it. A Virus also needs a living host to inhabit. It can only live for a day or two OUTSIDE of a living cell before dying itself (some can survive longer in a liquid environment).
Because of the Virus's immunity to bacteria and the fact that it frequently "mutates" from host to host, it can be VERY DIFFICULT to cure. It takes a Vaccine made from either a dead or a greatly weakened virus combined with other compounds to enable the body to generate the appropriate defense against the disease. The other option is a Viral Suppression Therapy. Some examples of Viral Suppression Therapy would include the invasive program of pills and intravenous treatment for HIV, Flu and Shingles Shots to prevent getting or at least reducing the severity of a viral strain if you contract it. Another example of a Viral Suppression Therapy would be the prescribing of Tamiflu for a severe flu outbreak. Some Suppression Therapies (like Tamiflu) would grant a +1 to treatment while others (like aggressive HIV treatment) would grant a +2. A VACCINE would provide a cure.
True. My main goal was to make it so there was a possibility of Phase I recovery IF you were already robust AND had a good doctor AND rare (in a post-apoc scenario) medicines. Someone who wanted an in-universe rationalization that probably makes no sense but sounds cool is that the virus doesn't directly infect humans, but rather infects a bacterium that then infects humans. Without the bacterium's protective coating, the virus dies in the human body, so the anti-bacterial is an indirect attack on the virus (I'm pretty sure that's total BS and would be shocked if a virus actually worked that way, but it'd be good enough for Hollywood ).

Quote:
To replicate this, I'd give a zombie a killing bite of from 0 (no penetration) to 2 points of wound damage (roll 1D3-1). Most HTH attacks would be "grappling attacks" designed to immobilize their "prey" so that they can "eat" (bite) that prey. This will result in a number of people getting bitten but then escaping from the grasp of their attackers.
Which, in turn, would make the unarmed combat supplement more useful, since different martial arts give bonuses or maluses to the "escape" action to get out of grapples.
__________________
Writer at The Vespers War - World War I equipment for v2.2
Reply With Quote