Howling Wilderness

[Raellus]

HW has been taking up quite a bit of our bandwidth lately. I'm sure we've had a thread, in the past, dedicated to HW, but I can't find it in the forum archives so...

If you'd like to engage in debate regarding the merits of HW, please do so here, and make sure to follow forum guidelines.

[kato13]

This was where I discussed how unrealistic the drought was (nearly 50% nationwide effecting nearly all regions when a 17% reductions was the greatest seen in over 120 years of data)

http://forum.juhlin.com/showthread.php?p=60546#post60546

[kato13]

This thread covers the weaknesses of HW's handling of presidential succession.

http://forum.juhlin.com/showthread.php?t=4509&highlight=succession


If you still want a scism you could have a missing member of the line of succession be found after someone further down the line was promoted to president. Milgov following the promoted SecDEF and Civgov following SecState who was missing and presumed dead for a while.

There could even be some intrigue about Military forces knowing the possibility SecState could have been alive but did not provide that intelligence and pushed the promotion of SecDef anyway.

[recon35]

I like that idea. Makes everything a bit murkier. No clear cut good guys or bad guys...

[The Dark]

This was where I discussed how unrealistic the drought was (nearly 50% nationwide effecting nearly all regions when a 17% reductions was the greatest seen in over 120 years of data)

http://forum.juhlin.com/showthread.php?p=60546#post60546

Given that the much smaller reductions that occurred in the 1930s were enough to drop Great Plains crop yields by 75%, the higher drought numbers seem unnecessary; a 10-15% drop sustained over a couple of years would cause the crop shortages that are mentioned in HW.

[Olefin]

This thread covers the weaknesses of HW's handling of presidential succession.

http://forum.juhlin.com/showthread.php?t=4509&highlight=succession


If you still want a scism you could have a missing member of the line of succession be found after someone further down the line was promoted to president. Milgov following the promoted SecDEF and Civgov following SecState who was missing and presumed dead for a while.

There could even be some intrigue about Military forces knowing the possibility SecState could have been alive but did not provide that intelligence and pushed the promotion of SecDef anyway.

I agree with you there Kato - the line of succession would definitely have not broken that easily - especially given that in a time of war once the nukes started flying there would have been successors dispersed all over the country - and the TDM was not the first nuke event - there had been attacks in Europe for weeks preceding that

[Olefin]

As I posted earlier HW was clearly an overboard attempt to explain the US not being the world's superpower in 2300 - so Loren wrote this to try to explain why the US wasnt as strong as before. However he did so in a way that pushed the bounds of what could be believed to where they broke - especially for those who knew that nuclear attacks on the scale of the war, if anything, would have thrown huge amounts of debris into the air and caused heavier winters and wetter weather and possibly shorter growing seasons.

Also the weather that affects much of the US would not have been affected by the location of the nuclear strikes in NA - you would would need to disrupt the weather patterns in the Pacific and Canada to really affect North American weather - and there werent enough nuke strikes in the right place to do that.

2300 AD doesnt need a destroyed US taking a huge amount of time to recover because a drought combined with nukes kills off 90% of its population to produce a French domination of the globe - all you need is the US deciding to go back to its roots as a regional power and letting the rest of the globe go on its own way to do that - and the events of 1996-2000 (i.e. before HW's uber drought occurred) were more than enough to make that a reality

And its future predictions for the rest of the year frankly have some major holes in them - there is no way MilGov would pull out of the only oil producing area left in CA, resulting in its strongest remaining unit mutinying against orders when the whole rest of the book states MilGov's big drive is to keep the remaining oil producing areas going at all costs

Let alone having its forces in CA go from 5000 men and 24 tanks down to 2800 men and seven tanks in barely eight months - and no effort being made to recruit new men to keep it formations intact - is frankly ridiculous - and of those men only 1600 are actually answering to the Army?

If food is short you arent going to have much trouble getting men to join up to defend that food - especially if wearing the uniform means you and your family are first in line for what food there is.

I can see some desertions - but having the US Army fall apart completely and not able to recruit at all when half the Southwest, Texas and a good piece of Alaska is under enemy occupation? And especially not after they found out what New America was up to - the Army would have been recruiting anyone who could still stand and carry a rifle!

And 43,000 men come home and less than 1400 are actually used as replacements? And those combat veterans with years of experience under their belts get sent to the Ozarks and basically get wiped out by a bunch of New American militia? (Do the math - 85th Infantry - 400 originals +600 combat vets from Europe + 400 from the 194th which was a training unit and thus elite =1400 men and by April only 300 survivors? I read the Ozarks and dont remember the NA being composed of only ex-Green Berets and Rangers).

And many of those units arrived in Bremerhaven intact and fully functional - including the 28th (which was the PA National Guard). The 28th could have formed up and walked home to rebuild PA - and yet they and several other fully functional units that were obeying MilGov higher command and showed up as functioning units in Bremerhaven all somehow just disappeared?

I dont see the US Army saying "nope lets just let them all go home, after all it would be too much trouble to have them form up again". They would have been sent from the docks in Norfolk as functional units to reinforce the 5th in Texas or kick butt in the Ozarks or say kiss it goodbye Charlie to NA in West Virginia. Thats why you bring them home in the first place.

If there is a module that seriously needs to be retconned and rewritten its HW.

Its not just the drought - the module as a whole goes way way out of its way to kill off the US and to make the US military sound very stupid while doing so.

[kato13]

Given that the much smaller reductions that occurred in the 1930s were enough to drop Great Plains crop yields by 75%, the higher drought numbers seem unnecessary; a 10-15% drop sustained over a couple of years would cause the crop shortages that are mentioned in HW.

I agree that significant crop losses would occur if we saw an increase over the worst months of 1934 and certainly if it ran into multiple years (HW has it all happening in one year) but even a long term drought would not effect all regions of the US equally hard as HW suggests (excluding the NW). There would probably be some areas with enough rain for stable crops, but that generates it own set of problems between the haves and the have nots.

One note though the US was insanely good at producing food prewar, with inefficient conversion (livestock feed/ethanol/cornsyrup) and exports totaling well over 50%.

A thread lost from our old site (before I was running things and everything gets backed up religiously), had data I spent about a week researching on what the overall calorie generation if we just had 10% of prewar US production (and remember this was with government incentives not to grow).

Counting only the 6 most productive grain crops the generation was 3100 calories per day per person. This excludes all fruits, vegetables, nuts, fish, game, etc. I know there would be losses and inefficiency everywhere (which is why i started at 10%), but there also would be expanded victory gardens, growing crops in parkland and similar expansion of agriculture. (Remember this is the 4th summer after the nukes so many issues of the initial food production issues would have been addressed - hybrid seeds for example).

Because of this and the fact that the drought (due to weather physics) cannot be everywhere, I still have a problem with the HW projected starvation rates.

If you want to throw in a blight or two (soviet bioweapons anyone?) you can probably hit the original numbers, but it is something again the I feel should be rethought if someone is looking closely at the details of HW.

[stilleto69]

This thread covers the weaknesses of HW's handling of presidential succession.

http://forum.juhlin.com/showthread.php?t=4509&highlight=succession


If you still want a scism you could have a missing member of the line of succession be found after someone further down the line was promoted to president. Milgov following the promoted SecDEF and Civgov following SecState who was missing and presumed dead for a while.

There could even be some intrigue about Military forces knowing the possibility SecState could have been alive but did not provide that intelligence and pushed the promotion of SecDef anyway.

I have something along that line in my universe. My universe has (wait for it) the VP is still alive, but in a coma. The warhead aimed at the WH missed, and in the ensuing evacuation the VP's helo went down (a la "By Dawn's Early Light") she was discovered by a search part and taken to the Alternative Military Command Center. She's been in a coma since, which is why my Gen. Cummings refuses to acknowledge Pres Bowman.

[The Dark]

I agree that significant crop losses would occur if we saw an increase over the worst months of 1934 and certainly if it ran into multiple years (HW has it all happening in one year) but even a long term drought would not effect all regions of the US equally hard as HW suggests (excluding the NW). There would probably be some areas with enough rain for stable crops, but that generates it own set of problems between the haves and the have nots.

One note though the US was insanely good at producing food prewar, with inefficient conversion (livestock feed/ethanol/cornsyrup) and exports totaling well over 50%.

A thread lost from our old site (before I was running things and everything gets backed up religiously), had data I spent about a week researching on what the overall calorie generation if we just had 10% of prewar US production (and remember this was with government incentives not to grow).

Counting only the 6 most productive grain crops the generation was 3100 calories per day per person. This excludes all fruits, vegetables, nuts, fish, game, etc. I know there would be losses and inefficiency everywhere (which is why i started at 10%), but there also would be expanded victory gardens, growing crops in parkland and similar expansion of agriculture. (Remember this is the 4th summer after the nukes so many issues of the initial food production issues would have been addressed - hybrid seeds for example).

Because of this and the fact that the drought (due to weather physics) cannot be everywhere, I still have a problem with the HW projected starvation rates.

If you want to throw in a blight or two (soviet bioweapons anyone?) you can probably hit the original numbers, but it is something again the I feel should be rethought if someone is looking closely at the details of HW.

One of the things I've been reading up on recently is the early history of rail transportation. Prior to the development of railroads, there were cases where famine and plenty were separated by only a few dozen miles, because food couldn't be easily transported more than a very short distance unless conditions were just right (being on the same river system, mostly). Using Florida as an example (since I grew up there), the coastal communities should mostly survive; fishing and trade along the coasts will let most of them do OK. Orlando will shrink dramatically; the only port within 50 miles is Sanford, which is 24 miles away and is about 150 miles from the ocean along the St. Johns River, which would become difficult to navigate as the dredged channels silted up. There's no good way of transporting food there without motorized rail or road vehicles.

On a grander scale, the ease of transporting goods in an industrialized society has led to extensive specialization predicated on being able to move goods from where they're concentrated to areas where they're needed. Without that transportation network, it becomes a crippling overspecialization. Corn and animals from the Great Plains can't reach the northeast, citrus and celery and cotton from the South has difficulty reach the Great Lakes, and the Rocky Mountains are basically a wall preventing any significant trade across them. Being able to grow crops isn't enough on its own; they need to be able to be transported where they're needed.

[kalos72]

In our campaign, we focused more on small scale local farming efforts and stepped away from the need to ship food across country. Smaller towns, victory gardens at EVERY home and keeping populations limited by the areas ability to grow its own food. If you are saying you can support 3-5 people per acre with modern farming practices and thinking about more organic natural systems, limit the population to that number times the number of acres you can put under seed.

If you get creative with your food production, there is NO reason why people have to die from hunger here. Its about priorities, training and dedication.

Today we are all distracted by the shiny things and the fact all I need to do is run down to the store to get some food or go to the local drive thru place. After a nuclear exchange, people will realize the need to be self sufficient.

[Raellus]

On a grander scale, the ease of transporting goods in an industrialized society has led to extensive specialization predicated on being able to move goods from where they're concentrated to areas where they're needed. Without that transportation network, it becomes a crippling overspecialization. Corn and animals from the Great Plains can't reach the northeast, citrus and celery and cotton from the South has difficulty reach the Great Lakes, and the Rocky Mountains are basically a wall preventing any significant trade across them. Being able to grow crops isn't enough on its own; they need to be able to be transported where they're needed.

Amen. I think that a lot of folks grossly underestimate the impact that the breakdown of our modern transportation system would have on food supplies. Seriously, how many of us would be able to survive if the shelves at the local supermarket were bare?

Those that minimize this impact should read up on the Hongerwinter, 1944-'45. Think about how a regional embargo of food and fuel could affect even a small country like Holland. Now, apply that scenario to a much, much larger country like the U.S.A. The impact would be devastating.

Now I know that a lot of people think that the mega-drought described in HW is terribly unrealistic and, perhaps, they are correct. But even a reprise of the widespread drought that occurred during the early 1930s could have devastating consequences when coupled with a badly disrupted transportation system (major hubs nuked, fuel and automotive/locomotive parts in very short supply).

[kato13]

Being able to grow crops isn't enough on its own; they need to be able to be transported where they're needed.

These restrictions while more complicated than an all encompassing (and hard to justify with science) drought, are to me much more interesting and actually allow the players to have an effect.

A 40-60% drought in 40+ continental states, to me, is overkill and doesn't allow for variation in what the players are dealing with. From HWs description the US will by august be dried out dead crops from sea to shining sea.

If you want a dire scenario have a worse than the 1934 drought in 16 major food producing states. Have a flu in a half dozen more. Have a hurricane swamp Florida or the Gulf Coast. Have transportation systems break down providing food to the East coast. Have locusts in the South and forest fires in California.

But have the overall effects be smaller, more localized, and more varied. Let the players mitigate the damage in a small area or simply move on to greener pastures.

I rarely venture from facts and into opinions and I suppose the above is about as much opinion as I ever do, but I feel it is a reasonable one given how unrealistic some aspects of HW are.

The writers of HW had what, a year to think things out, we have a group here that has been thinking about it for 30+ years. A larger group, with more access to information than the original team (mightily talented as they were) could ever dream of. I personally don't want to put any blocks on peoples efforts to find better and more interesting solutions to questions many of us ask about the game.

[Raellus]

But have the overall effects be smaller, more localized, and more varied. Let the players mitigate the damage in a small area or simply move on to greener pastures.

I like this approach. I don't know what the writers of HW were thinking. I don't know if they were really trying to plot out a future that would dovetail with T2300 or whatever. I suspect that they were trying to create a U.S. in which the players' actions could have a bigger impact but I agree with those who think that they went a bit overboard.

I favor a small solution- something akin to what you outlined- over a major RETCON.

Again, I can see how HW can really bother GM's with a macro-view mindset focused on world-building, but I also agree with those who've pointed out that the players in a single campaign are probably not too worried about the big picture- are they really going to know or care about the TOE of the entire U.S. military c. 2001, or the nationwide death rate? They're probably going to be more concerned about the marauders over the next hill, or the NA cell trying to set up shop near their cantonment, or feeding the small town they call home.

[kato13]

Again, I can see how HW can really bother GM's with a macro-view mindset focused on world-building, but I also agree with those who've pointed out that the players in a single campaign are probably not too worried about the big picture- are they really going to know or care about the TOE of the entire U.S. military c. 2001, or the nationwide death rate? They're probably going to be more concerned about the marauders over the next hill, or the NA cell trying to set up shop near their cantonment, or feeding the small town they call home.

I can see both sides but an HW with many smaller problems can be enjoyable to more groups. If everything goes bad you get the current HW, if the players can solve one or two problems in a macro way, you get something just a little bit better in one region. If you have a HUGE macro campaign where you can get traffic moving on the Mississippi, Tamiflu to the great lakes states and petrochemical fertilizers and insecticides from Texas to the South, maybe just maybe a real difference can be made.

[Raellus]

I can see both sides but an HW with many smaller problems can be enjoyable to more groups. If everything goes bad you get the current HW, if the players can solve one or two problems in a macro way, you get something just a little bit better in one region. If you have a HUGE macro campaign where you can get traffic moving on the Mississippi, Tamiflu to the great lakes states and petrochemical fertilizers and insecticides from Texas to the South, maybe just maybe a real difference can be made.

Agreed, Kato. This is what I'm calling the Small Solution- a toned-down version of HW where things are still bad but not that bad.

[Olefin]

Agreed, Kato. This is what I'm calling the Small Solution- a toned-down version of HW where things are still bad but not that bad.

And agreed here as well Raellus and Kato - never said to get rid of all of HW - there are good things in there - but overall the way its written its so hopeless that players can't really do anything but barely survive

and that is completely different from the previous American modules where players could really make a difference by their actions

as obviously HW was written to show - i.e. NA isnt written saying the kidnapping of NA's leader hadnt happened yet or failed - it very definitely said it had succeeded and NA was disorganized as a result of it

[mpipes]

Seriously, how many of us would be able to survive if the shelves at the local supermarket were bare?

That really depends on how many guns and bullets you have versus the other fellow with the food, doesn't it? ;)

[Raellus]

That really depends on how many guns and bullets you have versus the other fellow with the food, doesn't it? ;)

That's a nightmare scenario that doesn't bode well for the future of American civilization. Who needs a mega-drought when your own neighborhood turns on itself?

[Draq]

Agreed, Kato. This is what I'm calling the Small Solution- a toned-down version of HW where things are still bad but not that bad.

Now that is an idea

[mpipes]

That's a nightmare scenario that doesn't bode well for the future of American civilization. Who needs a mega-drought when your own neighborhood turns on itself?

The REAL NIGHTMARE is where you are holding barbeques with the neighbors as the main course!!

I was struck at how dire HW painted and things and remember thinking that very thought during my first reading.

[kato13]

If you want a dire scenario have a worse than the 1934 drought in 16 major food producing states. Have a flu in a half dozen more. Have a hurricane swamp Florida or the Gulf Coast. Have transportation systems break down providing food to the East coast. Have locusts in the South and forest fires in California.


Im starting to think 2017 could be a template for any updated disaster thoughts as the Flu is predicted to be massive this year.
https://www.acsh.org/sites/default/files/Screen%20Shot%202017-09-07%20at%2010.47.12%20AM.jpg
(Australian flu rates - they generally are a good predictor)


edit, We could also move the Mexico Earthquake a bit north as well.

[Olefin]

There are lots of issues with HW that have more to do with GDW rushing to meet deadlines and not researching or thinking things out the whole way - many of which I have already spelled out - and by the way none of these have anything to do with the completely unrealistic drought and food situation that if you do the math destroys the US as a country and civilization most likely for good

Things like how did the Mexicans occupy southern CA and much of AZ when the water that keeps them alive comes from aqueducts whose pumps have no power and even if they did would have needed water to be pumped from areas under US control - meaning the US had the perfect weapon to use to take back both areas and instead just provided water to the Mexicans?

Or like the US military absolutely falling apart at home when apparently the Germans and the UK have no issue getting replacements at home and they can keep their units at least semi-intact - but ours cant recruit one new soldier?

Or having two Soviet divisions come over to the US in Alaska as clearly stated in the Soviet Vehicle Guide and then disappear completely from the forces available to MilGov in HW

Or having 43000 men come home and only 1400 are ever used

Or having the 28th Inf not go home as a unit and report to Harrisburg and get sent to wipe out the White Death in western PA

Or having the NA forces in the Ozarks just about wipe out a unit that is mostly either European combat veterans or elite training troops - again as I said the only way that happens is if NA is all either Rangers or Special Forces

Or having Civgov catch the head of NA along with enough material to show clearly the threat to the US that they posed but decide to not communicate it to Milgov and bury the hatchet to go after NA instead - which 100% would have happened - sorry that right there alone makes HW just fall apart

I can go on if you like

[Apache6]

I've always thought it was completely unrealistic that the Nation (US) did not sustain a boot camp program where they continued to train replacements.

Would the quality of training have declined? Yes. Would the units be less well equipped? Yes. Would individuals still enlist based on the fact that they (and their families) were going to get fed? Yes. Would their be conscription? Yes; into both "Federal and State units."

If you look at Germany at the end of WWII, they were still training units and individual replacements.

For role playing this gives lots of opportunities.
1) Your a grizzled veteran given command of a dozen ill equipped, half trained "children." What do you do to ensure they survive?

2) Your a ill equipped, half trained "youngster," assigned as an individual replacement to a company of grizzled veterans. How do you adapt? Do you desert or try to excel?

3) You are press ganged into the Army. What now?

4) You are an over age veteran, called out of retirement and asked to form a unit out of a unit of ill equipped, half trained "children." You have to stop an attack from a superior force in 10 days. What do you do for training, fortificagtion...

5) You are a disabled veteran tasked to form an lead an elite strike force out of a squad of physically fit but ill equipped, half trained "children."

I added a bunch of green recruits in a potential players tasking that can be found by searching State Reconstruction Team 9.

[Olefin]

And for those saying - well what would they arm those new recruits with - well the US has one hell of a lot of guns - and many of them would be more than adequate for militia units - including a lot of old surplus WWI and WWII guns like Springfield, Mauser and Garand rifles - if they were good enough to be used in WWII they would be more than good enough to be used to arm new units here in the States

[Raellus]

Or having 43000 men come home and only 1400 are ever used

Yeah, that kind of boggles the mind. It's a stretch, but maybe the homecoming troops were all demobilized but given the choice to reenlist. On paper, all 40k are demob'd, hence the befuddling figure, but in reality, a good percentage re-enlist after finding out that their loved ones are dead or behind Mexican lines. The U.S. Army might have to be reorganized to effectively make use of the re-uppers.

As for ways that player characters could help rebuild the devastated U.S.A. of HW, here are a few that spring to mind:


Locating and securing a rumored cache of drought-resistant heirloom seeds. Maybe send them to retrieve sees from that underground Norwegian cache in the arctic circle. That's an adventure module all in itself.

Along the same lines, but with GMO'd drought-resistant seeds.

Something with water. Secure a dam or provide security for a construction crew repairing an existing dam or building a new one.

I changed RESET in one of my campaigns for plans for a functioning cold-fusion reactor. Clean, almost unlimited energy would be of great benefit in rebuilding the U.S.A.


I don't know, but I like the idea of taking the lemons presented in HW and finding ways for player characters to make lemonade.

[Olefin]

I think that you can make the lemons and do it with Marc's blessing as long as there is a good reason behind it - from what he told me he is willing to revisit areas if you do it with some kind of mission as part of it

i.e. you bring the 28th back to PA but maybe its to locate more supply caches

or you can have a bunch of guys from the 28th sent to get the supplies that Civgov just grabbed in Allegheny Uprising that they are planning to keep for themselves to use to get to the Ohio Valley - but instead they are going to make sure they stay in PA - it would be a way to finally have Civgov versus Milgov combat in the game which would be a new dynamic

[WallShadow]

I think that you can make the lemons and do it with Marc's blessing as long as there is a good reason behind it - from what he told me he is willing to revisit areas if you do it with some kind of mission as part of it

i.e. you bring the 28th back to PA but maybe its to locate more supply caches

or you can have a bunch of guys from the 28th sent to get the supplies that Civgov just grabbed in Allegheny Uprising that they are planning to keep for themselves to use to get to the Ohio Valley - but instead they are going to make sure they stay in PA - it would be a way to finally have Civgov versus Milgov combat in the game which would be a new dynamic
Or the Governor of PA hears rumors from the recon of Bolivar, WV, with its stacks and stacks of provisions and military gear. Time for a surprise takeover and haul-back of vitally-needed ammo, spare parts, medicine, and shelf-stable food that is sitting there. That could be a campaign right there, with a "civilian" convoy trying to sneak its way close to the supply depot, then a covert insertion, and decapitation of the NA command structure, leading to chaos and an opportunity to shove the Nammies (New Americans) out of the town before the supplies can be destroyed or the security forces can regroup. Maybe some of the more amenable Allegheny militias might contribute some forces for a cut of the haul. And the refugee camps at Reading, Pottstown, and Allentown might be canvassed for volunteers for manpower and/or morale boosting--heroes returning to their camps with supplies, tools, arms, and a story to tell about potential for improving their lot--hope for the future.

[Cdnwolf]

Or having 43000 men come home and only 1400 are ever used



I think Army of Darkness answered some of this question. The Milgov was also trying trying to re-establish control of major cities in its region and may have sent units in to pacify the area.


The player characters are members of an advance party sent
into New York City to gather information which will permit the
Military Government to re-assert control over the city. Milgov
is particularly interested in three basic categories of information:

Census: One of the Military Government's first steps in securing
control of the New York area must be to count and register
the inhabitants. No one knows for sure how many of New York
City's eight million inhabitants are still alive, and how many remain
among the empty glass and steel towers of America's
largest city.
Once the government knows how many people remain in New
York City, they will be able to take steps to organize the survivors
into work forces and begin the city's reconstruction.

Salvage: With registration, the government can begin collecting
taxes from the inhabitants-taxation being the ultimate sign
and proof of a government's control over its citizens. New York
City must still hold vast treasures which Milgov can use to
secure its own position and prestige; treasures such as
salvageable computers and telecommunications gear, copper
tubing, refined steel, chemicals, heavy machinery, ball bearings,
telephone wires, diesel and gasoline engines, auto and truck
parts, and a wealth of other flotsam and jetsam of civilization.
Milgov taxes will consist of a portion of the items salvaged. Initially,
these will be used to get local government back on its feet.
The players are to recover and/or take steps to preserve any
surviving electronic and telecommunications equipment, plus
other material or data of technical, historical, or cultural value.
Particular attention is to be paid to securing computers and data
processing equipment which was only slightly damaged by EMP.

The players are ordered to prevent the further deterioration
of the city's buildings, and salvage what they can from those
which are not in suitable condition for reoccupation. Private
salvage operations are to be encouraged, registered and licensed,
and taxes levied (in kind) on any salvage operations.

[Targan]

Ah yes, the NYC census mission. The original trigger for Major Po's "Target Zero" doctrine.

[Olefin]

love the idea of a mission for a reformed 28th - that matches closes to my timeline that was based on how my GM saw the history going forward as to MilGov going to attack NA including the lead up to Kidnapped - if the scouts find all those supplies there you know that they would be a major target - and that combined with what they would see as Civgov "stealing" supplies that are by all rights for the people of PA would make for a couple of very fun adventures

[Webstral]

There are aspects of Howling Wilderness that characterize a creative venture circling the drain. There’s a very strong Mad Max-ification of the North American campaign. Someone from the GDW team wrote that they were trying to address the perception among the fan base that things were getting back to normal. For whatever reason, they chose a rather severe overreaction to an unfounded perception. Chaos is better for game play than law and order, to be sure. Perhaps GDW felt that the players had to believe they were the only force between the remnants of the nation and utter ruin. I don’t know. I do agree with everyone else who has noted the change in tone from Europe and North American modules like Armies of the Night and Allegheny Uprising.

[Raellus]

Perhaps there's no mention of all of previous modules in HW because, as a writer trying to sell product, Wiseman had to assume that purchasers' gaming groups hadn't completed those module missions yet? I mean, otherwise, he's essentially ruining all those other products with spoilers (i.e. how their successful completion would influence the game world)- including, most significantly, Going Home!

It's kind of a damned-if-you-do, damned-if-you-don't scenario. By failing to account for the outcomes of those modules, it seems like he's being careless or super absent-minded. By including all that stuff, he's basically screwing GDW/FFE over by giving away the major plot points of many of the previously-published, still-for-sale, adventure modules for the low, low price of a single sourcebook- HW. Why would you buy module X when you already know how it's supposed to end?!?

So, the lesser of evils may have been to ignore anything covered previous canonical works. That's why the ETO units are not mentioned at all in HW.

What would be really helpful to Ref's then is an official addendum to HW, with the results of earlier modules factored in- kind of like a flow-chart. For example, "If the players successfully completed module X, then Y would be affected in the following ways. If they failed to obtain [insert Macguffin], the situation will be as described."

[Olefin]

There is only one issue with that Raellus - HW mentions that there are troops that came home on Omega that were sent as reinforcements to other US based divisions - now that doesnt cover Satellite Down and Last Submarine

Also Kidnapped is referred to in Howling Wilderness in the NA area of the module

so that means those units did get home and Loren either forgot about them or didnt know what to do with them except parcel out a couple thousand men from the nearly 40,000 plus that got home

[Raellus]

For someone who hates the module so much, you know it really well! :D (Better than I do, that's for sure.)

[Olefin]

That is why my issues with the module were so informed - for one I own it so I read it cover to cover. For another I am still looking to write more modules and as Marc Miller told me I had to consider HW as canon - thus if I am going to release modules set in the US I need to see how I can proceed with that as the basis.

Also while much of it has a lot of issues it does offer valuable information on the situation in the US during the run up to Kidnapped - and while I dont agree with what it does to the US units I have to use that as what the situation was in April of 2001 - however that doesnt mean after that date I have to see it as gospel. The rest of the year isnt set in stone as the canon releases basically died at that point. Thus I see those as more projections of what might happen not what really happened.

But up to the actual canon date mentioned for the situation in the US - that I have to take as canon whether I agree with it or not - at least as a writer whose material has to be approved by Marc for publication.

[Enfield]

There is mention of the dwindling enclave at Norfolk in the Virginia entry in HW. When I originally ran "Going Home" I had the stragglers assigned to units which were reinforced. In my case I had them sent to join the forces invading Arkansas anyway.

The issue I had was with the entire units being evacuated, which are never mentioned again. While they did not have their heavy equipment, they nevertheless were led, organized and should have been deployed in some manner instead of the impression you get which is that they're sitting on their butts doing nothing.

Perhaps that is the greatest issue people had with it. Unlike the US Army Vehicle Guide, which provides a basis for how units were orgnized and equipment stats, prices and illustrations, it feels half done, not really fleshed out and requires more work on the part of the GM.

[Olefin]

I agree with the fact that HW does not feel completely thought out - that it was probably rushed to market before anyone had a chance to look at it - and what gets me is that Loren and Frank Chadwick wrote Going Home - so if anyone would have had the information on what happened to those divisions sent home it would have been Loren

I could see the disorganized units that arrived that had broke up even before they got to the evac point not being much use when they got back - but a bunch of them arrived intact, under orders and still disciplined - sorry but those units dont just fall apart upon arrival if they held together thru four years of hell in Europe - not when the US still has foreign invaders on its soil and has huge areas with no security at all

[Raellus]

I could see the disorganized units that arrived that had broke up even before they got to the evac point not being much use when they got back - but a bunch of them arrived intact, under orders and still disciplined - sorry but those units dont just fall apart upon arrival if they held together thru four years of hell in Europe - not when the US still has foreign invaders on its soil and has huge areas with no security at all

I've said it before, but the above is where I think you are failing to factor in the human element of combat fatigue and homesickness. You're looking at this more than like an accountant, and less like a psychologist/sociologist.

Civil War vets didn't have to fight- away from home- for four or more years. Neither did WWII vets. Even in our longest wars, Vietnam and The War on Terror, the majority of vets didn't have to be away from home continuously for more than 12 or 13 months at a stretch. To expect nearly every returning soldier to stay in uniform, follow orders, and not go home (i.e. desert) at the first or second opportunity, is almost as unrealistic as the disappearance of so much returning NorthAg and CentAg strength.

As I've already mentioned elsewhere, desertion was a big issue for the U.S. military in the ETO during WWII, despite cultural barriers and no realistic way of getting back to the States (don't believe me, check out Charles Glass' The Deserters). It was an even bigger problem during the American Civil War when both sides fought much closer to home. If you haven't already watched it, you should check out the movie, Free State of Jones.

Come on, now. If you hadn't seen your family in [up to] four years, and hadn't heard from them in nearly as long, you would stay in camp and prepare to redeploy to God-knows-where simply because your unit "arrived intact, under orders and still disciplined" and your CO ordered you to? Well, you might answer yes to that question, but I think a lot of people would answer, "Heck no. I've given my country x years of my young adulthood, risked my life, killed, and seen my buddies blown away. The least they can do is let me go see if my family is OK. If they don't, well then, screw 'em. Let somebody else take a turn at the front line. I'm leaving. Let them try to stop me."

Again, I think if MilGov did try to stop large number of returning soldiers from going home, they'd have a large-scale mutiny on their hands. Or some units might declare for CivGov. Their best option is a furlough program. This would avoid a mutiny and increase the odds of retaining troops over the long-run. However, I think a significant percentage of furloughed soldiers would take advantage and not return.

[Olefin]

And I see your point Raellus - but not to the level in the module - its very obvious there was a major oversight - desertion I can see - but the levels in HW would have to be close to 90 percent given how many soldiers are unaccounted for - and as I said I can see the disorganized units going over the hill - but that still leaves 20,000 plus men left in multiple formations - its not plausible - frankly HW has to be looked at as a deeply flawed work - not the least because of the complete and totally overlooking of what happened to the men who came home

[Targan]

Come on, now. If you hadn't seen your family in [up to] four years, and hadn't heard from them in nearly as long, you would stay in camp and prepare to redeploy to God-knows-where simply because your unit "arrived intact, under orders and still disciplined" and your CO ordered you to? Well, you might answer yes to that question, but I think a lot of people would answer, "Heck no. I've given my country x years of my young adulthood, risked my life, killed, and seen my buddies blown away. The least they can do is let me go see if my family is OK. If they don't, well then, screw 'em. Let somebody else take a turn at the front line. I'm leaving. Let them try to stop me."

Arriving back in the shattered remains of CONUS, I reckon many soldiers would be desperate to the point of madness to get back to their homes and see who of their loved ones were left.

[Legbreaker]

As I've mentioned many times in the past, neither government in 2000-01 has the resources to adequately supply the small forces they already had in the field. Add another 50,000 or so and you've completely smashed any logistical network they still had.
Honestly, I don't see Milgov had a choice in the matter. Sure, they held onto a few vital or highly skilled personnel, but the rest mostly likely were given a weeks rations, a set of civilian clothes and shown the door. Most would be more than happy to see the back of the military too by that point and gladly taken what was offered.

[CDAT]

I've said it before, but the above is where I think you are failing to factor in the human element of combat fatigue and homesickness. You're looking at this more than like an accountant, and less like a psychologist/sociologist.
But the human element is not a constant factor, it does not affect everyone the same. From my prospective combat fatigue is vastly over blown, I think mostly due to Hollywood and the media. Based on my personal experience I have served closely with about 1000 or so, and can count on one hand the number that have moderate to severe combat fatigue, and maybe another handful that have minor. So like I said I think it is very over blown, as my personal experience puts it at about 1% (am I am willing to say that it could be higher, but nothing like what you see from media).


As I've already mentioned elsewhere, desertion was a big issue for the U.S. military in the ETO during WWII, despite cultural barriers and no realistic way of getting back to the States (don't believe me, check out Charles Glass' The Deserters). It was an even bigger problem during the American Civil War when both sides fought much closer to home. If you haven't already watched it, you should check out the movie, Free State of Jones.
I am not sure that the cultural barriers were that big in the ETO during WWII, German has been one of the major places that immigrants to the US came from, so for a lot of troops it was not that major of a cultural barrier but the culture of their parents (or grandparents).

Come on, now. If you hadn't seen your family in [up to] four years, and hadn't heard from them in nearly as long, you would stay in camp and prepare to redeploy to God-knows-where simply because your unit "arrived intact, under orders and still disciplined" and your CO ordered you to? Well, you might answer yes to that question, but I think a lot of people would answer, "Heck no. I've given my country x years of my young adulthood, risked my life, killed, and seen my buddies blown away. The least they can do is let me go see if my family is OK. If they don't, well then, screw 'em. Let somebody else take a turn at the front line. I'm leaving. Let them try to stop me." This is the much more tricky one I think, more so for Guard and Reserve units, who I could see really wanting to go home, but an active duty unit that if still in good spirits more willing to hold to the party line, even more if they are being sent to there pre-deploment home base area.

[Legbreaker]

With active "fronts" (if you can still call them that in 2001) in Alaska and the south west, as well as clashes with Civgov, it would seem very unlikely any unit would be sent anywhere near their prewar base, such as exists post nuke.
With the extremely limited logistics and transportation available, any troops retained would be best used as reinforcements - there's just no way even a single battalion is going to be able to be shifted half way across the continent, but it might be possible to move a few score, perhaps a couple of hundred.

[CDAT]

With active "fronts" (if you can still call them that in 2001) in Alaska and the south west, as well as clashes with Civgov, it would seem very unlikely any unit would be sent anywhere near their prewar base, such as exists post nuke.

Now I have to say first that I do not have the Howling Wilderness expansion so some of the details I do not have. But if I understand it correct these are the troops returning from Europe, I can not see them leaving equipment behind when the left, as they do not know what they are going home to, but do know that the world is not the same as they left it. So if the unit has the cohesion to make it across Europe, get transport back to the states, and are still a viable combat unit. And you want them to go fight in Alaska or the South West, but are not willing to let them do a "drive by" of there old base to pick up families and such. That I agree is going to have mass desertion, but if you have a unit that was stationed at FT Hood TX (I do not remember if it was nuked or not, but for sake of argument we will say it was) and they are reading and willing to head off to the south west, but say they are going to go by FT Hood on the way and pick up what families they can, I see this as a good thing. When so many of the units are being forced to grow there own food, produce there own fuel and such having their families with them makes them more likely to fight to keep the country together and work to stabilize it. So to be clearer on what I meant by being sent to there home base, this is what I am talking about, I am not saying that you need or even would want to send a viable combat unit to Ft Drum when there is no combat any place near there, but letting them swing by and pick up their families on the way, yes.

With the extremely limited logistics and transportation available, any troops retained would be best used as reinforcements - there's just no way even a single battalion is going to be able to be shifted half way across the continent, but it might be possible to move a few score, perhaps a couple of hundred.
As for the logistics and transportation I would see it for the most part being what they returned to the States with be that just the simple LPC up to the mighty tanks and anything in between they were able to get across Europe now if they have some spare parts and stuff to help them, that would be good. But yes I agree that is going to be very limited, and even if they did just tell them you are out now, here is a weeks food have a nice day. If I have been working/fighting and just staying alive with the same bunch of guys for the last several years, unless we are all form very different parts of the nation I do not see them splitting up, if you have a group of guys from say a Midwest state or two, Colorado, Washington and Oregon, I would expect them to head out as a group at least to the closest home on the way, there if it is nice and they still have family there I could see the group start to break up, but if it is not nice and/or they no longer have living family there I would not be surprised to see them stick together to the next and so on.

[Legbreaker]

The troops brought back had nothing but their personal weapons and little else. There were virtually no vehicles and even the heavy weapons such as rockets, automatic grenade launchers, machineguns and the like were handed over to the Germans as payment for the crude oil which gets the ships across the Atlantic.
Upon arrival in the US they land at New Norfolk, a port which had been nuked. Virtually all war stores had already been sent to Europe, the Middle East, Korea and Africa (not to mention desperately needed in Texas and Alaska). There's just nothing left to equip them with - any transport of note is very likely to be civilian in nature and "requisitioned" upon landing.
What Milgov have come December 2000 is upwards of 50,000 hungry mouths, no practical way of moving them, almost no capacity to feed them, and even if they could be moved somehow, nothing to re-equip them with. Demobilisation, in the short term at least, is their only feasible option.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

Something that definitely needs to be factored into the whole issue of combat fatigue is that these are troops who have been deployed for several years. This is like WW1 and WW2, not like the 3-month or 6-month deployments that are typical of today.
I don't believe you can adequately calculate the effects of combat fatigue on people who have been deployed continuously (also with the knowledge that their homeland wasn't spared from the war), in a global war that's lasted nearly half a decade when the only comparison you have is deployments that don't even last a year.

[Raellus]

But the human element is not a constant factor, it does not affect everyone the same.

That's true. Sociopaths don't seem to suffer from PTSD. And I wasn't claiming that all returning vets would be suffering from psychological trauma. Most long-serving combat vets (see StainlessSteelCynic's reiteration of an earlier point), however, very likely would. See my next point for scholarly support.

From my prospective combat fatigue is vastly over blown, I think mostly due to Hollywood and the media. Based on my personal experience I have served closely with about 1000 or so, and can count on one hand the number that have moderate to severe combat fatigue, and maybe another handful that have minor. So like I said I think it is very over blown, as my personal experience puts it at about 1% (am I am willing to say that it could be higher, but nothing like what you see from media).

First off, serious military historians have documented the prevalence of Shell Shock/Combat Fatigue/PTSD. Read Ambrose's Citizen Soldiers (WWII) and Grossman's On Killing (Vietnam) for just a couple of well-respected authors' reserach on its prevalence.

Second, statistically speaking, 1000 is a very small sample size. Did you know each one of those 1000 vets personally? Did you conduct a longitudinal study (over time) on all 1000 of those vets? Are you a trained counselor or psychologist? If you can honestly answer yes to all three questions, then your observations may have scientific merit. With all due respect, your personal experience is not conclusive evidence of an media-orchestrated exaggeration in the impact of Combat Fatigue/PTSD in long-serving combat vets.

I am not sure that the cultural barriers were that big in the ETO during WWII, German has been one of the major places that immigrants to the US came from, so for a lot of troops it was not that major of a cultural barrier but the culture of their parents (or grandparents).

Um, most GI's didn't speak French, or Dutch, or German, so yeah, there was a big cultural barrier. Again, I would encourage you to read The Deserters, by Glass, if you're interested in learning about this topic.

[Raellus]

The troops brought back had nothing but their personal weapons and little else. There were virtually no vehicles and even the heavy weapons such as rockets, automatic grenade launchers, machineguns and the like were handed over to the Germans as payment for the crude oil which gets the ships across the Atlantic.
Upon arrival in the US they land at New Norfolk, a port which had been nuked. Virtually all war stores had already been sent to Europe, the Middle East, Korea and Africa (not to mention desperately needed in Texas and Alaska). There's just nothing left to equip them with - any transport of note is very likely to be civilian in nature and "requisitioned" upon landing.
What Milgov have come December 2000 is upwards of 50,000 hungry mouths, no practical way of moving them, almost no capacity to feed them, and even if they could be moved somehow, nothing to re-equip them with. Demobilisation, in the short term at least, is their only feasible option.

This is a good point- one that's been raised before, but bears repeating. And to return to my points about combat fatigue and homesickness, if most of those 50k troops have to march from Norfolk to active fronts in the south and southwest (due to a lack of motor transportation/fuel), I imagine that MilGov would lose many- to desertion- along the way.

[CDAT]

The troops brought back had nothing but their personal weapons and little else. There were virtually no vehicles and even the heavy weapons such as rockets, automatic grenade launchers, machineguns and the like were handed over to the Germans as payment for the crude oil which gets the ships across the Atlantic.
Upon arrival in the US they land at New Norfolk, a port which had been nuked. Virtually all war stores had already been sent to Europe, the Middle East, Korea and Africa (not to mention desperately needed in Texas and Alaska). There's just nothing left to equip them with - any transport of note is very likely to be civilian in nature and "requisitioned" upon landing.
What Milgov have come December 2000 is upwards of 50,000 hungry mouths, no practical way of moving them, almost no capacity to feed them, and even if they could be moved somehow, nothing to re-equip them with. Demobilisation, in the short term at least, is their only feasible option.
This I did not know, but would still think that the best use of them would be to get them moving on their LPC's and if they are not a viable combat element, send them home to be a home guard and keep the marauders down. This gives them the rest they need, at the same time kind of keeps them in uniform available for call up when/if they can get the heavy gear needed. Now how many would answer that call up I can not say, depends on how long it takes to happen, where you are asking them to go, and all that.

[CDAT]

Something that definitely needs to be factored into the whole issue of combat fatigue is that these are troops who have been deployed for several years. This is like WW1 and WW2, not like the 3-month or 6-month deployments that are typical of today.
I don't believe you can adequately calculate the effects of combat fatigue on people who have been deployed continuously (also with the knowledge that their homeland wasn't spared from the war), in a global war that's lasted nearly half a decade when the only comparison you have is deployments that don't even last a year.

I wish I had 3/6 month deployments my short ones were almost a year and a half. Now yes that is not multi-year even if my second and third were almost back to back I did get a short break in between. But between 2003 and 2010 I was deployed for about five years. And yes (I think the bigger issue) my home was not also under attack. But I still do not buy the levels of combat fatigue that I am seeing people saying on here would happen.

[CDAT]

That's true. Sociopaths don't seem to suffer from PTSD. And I wasn't claiming that all returning vets would be suffering from psychological trauma. Most long-serving combat vets (see StainlessSteelCynic's reiteration of an earlier point), however, very likely would. See my next point for scholarly support. I am saying that I think it would be a small amount, but I am see (maybe I am missing something) most saying it is going to be the majority, and that is what I am saying I do not think would be the case. Some yes, large percentage no.



First off, serious military historians have documented the prevalence of Shell Shock/Combat Fatigue/PTSD. Read Ambrose's Citizen Soldiers (WWII) and Grossman's On Killing (Vietnam) for just a couple of well-respected authors' reserach on its prevalence.
I have read those and other of Grossman's books as well as attended his lectures and talked with him in person some about this issue, and I am coming up with very different results in what I am reading. Now maybe it is because Shell Shock/Combat Fatigue/PTSD are used today interchangeably when not all think that they are the same thing. Some see it like heat exhaustion and heat stroke. Related but not the exact same thing and there is not a defined term for each level, someone who has been in combat for any length of time will be exhausted, but that is not the same as combat fatigue. Some one who has been in battle every day for some time, and/or has been under fire will likely have some combat fatigue/shell shock, but if they are taken out of that situation for a bit of time they go back to normal, if keep there it may (but not always) become permanent, to have full blown PTSD they have to experience something traumatic and here is the problem what is traumatic to one, is not to the next. There are people who get it from seeing an auto accident, and others watching a close friend/family member do not, and then there again is the level of impact it has on the person varies.


Second, statistically speaking, 1000 is a very small sample size. Did you know each one of those 1000 vets personally? Did you conduct a longitudinal study (over time) on all 1000 of those vets? Are you a trained counselor or psychologist? If you can honestly answer yes to all three questions, then your observations may have scientific merit. With all due respect, your personal experience is not conclusive evidence of an media-orchestrated exaggeration in the impact of Combat Fatigue/PTSD in long-serving combat vets. And I did not say that it was conclusive evidence, I did say that to me it suggests. Yes I did know all of them personally, most were from a guard unit I was in for several years before/after we deployed and I have some training in counseling, but no I did not do a case study of them, that is one of the reasons I was willing to admit it could be higher. I have seen some media reports saying that every vet has PTSD and so can not be trusted, so once again I am just saying I do believe some will have it, but I believe it is a small percentage I would guess (and it is just that a guess) it would be 10% or less, but would not say maybe a high as 25%, not the 50% to 100% that I have seen in different things from the media.

Um, most GI's didn't speak French, or Dutch, or German, so yeah, there was a big cultural barrier. Again, I would encourage you to read The Deserters, by Glass, if you're interested in learning about this topic.
Two things here and then I am done with the topic, first maybe I am the outlier but almost every person of that age and almost every WWII Vet that I have had the opportunity to spend much time around did speak at least some of their ancestral language. Second when I was in Germany (and I do not speak German) I was able to get around OK, as it was amazing to me how much I understood because English is descended from German.

And with that I am out, it is your game play how you want, I may be the outlier, or I may not. It is a game lets all just have fun and enjoy it.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

EDIT: Rereading what CDAT had added to the thread, I do actually agree with some points he made. I do believe the media has grossly exaggerated the accounts of combat fatigue and I also know from some personal contact that some people claiming to suffer PTSD have been attention seekers at best or at worst, some of them have been scammers seeking to get the sympathy (and sometimes the medication) that comes with acknowledgement of suffering.

ORIGINAL POST: I don't think anyone said the majority of troops would be suffering combat fatigue. It seemed to me that people were saying that it was a serious consideration to take into account and should not be readily dismissed as a minor concern.

People who have constantly been at war (and this is world-wide, total war with the use of nuclear weapons), for several years are going to be under a lot more stress than those people who are fighting in the current conflicts we see in the real world at the moment. I really don't believe a comparison can be made between the two.

Plus in the real world, modern Western militaries have access to psychological and other counseling services that helps mitigate the problem, this obviously would not exist in the Twilight War.

[Legbreaker]

It's worth bearing in mind also that a very large proportion of the 50,000 are reinforcements and conscripts. How many are career military and had been there from the beginning? Combat losses surely took a heavy toll on the professional soldiers. How many of those would even want to stay in the military if given the chance to get out?

Pretty sure though the conscripts would jump at the chance to be demobilised, even many of the National Guard would be happy to get out of uniform - how many would have joined a few years earlier expecting to only ever be called up for civil defence / disaster relief operations?

Of the few who were kept in uniform and sent on to other units or stayed as local security, it would seem very likely the majority (if not all) were career soldiers. It is almost certain any technical specialists, SF operators and so on would have been kept on though regardless of their status as conscripts or volunteers - those skills are hard to come by and wouldn't be easily given up by Milgov.

By 2001 the war is basically over. Nobody anywhere is in a position to conduct more than local patrolling with perhaps a small scale and limited offensive to secure their currently occupied area or obtain badly needed resources. Many may be wondering what's the point in fighting any more?

[RN7]

Two things here and then I am done with the topic, first maybe I am the outlier but almost every person of that age and almost every WWII Vet that I have had the opportunity to spend much time around did speak at least some of their ancestral language. Second when I was in Germany (and I do not speak German) I was able to get around OK, as it was amazing to me how much I understood because English is descended from German.

I visited Germany in the late 1980's (West Germany) and in the 1990's and I had very little problem communicating or understanding signs due to the fact that (1) most West Germans under the age of 50 had either some knowledge of or could speak English very well, and (2) reading and understanding most written German worlds is not that difficult for an English speaker because as CDAT pointed out English is descended from German.

[Cdnwolf]

Lets talk about the elephant in the room. Did Munson kill the President and have advance knowledge of the attack?

President Tanner was killed, not by the strike on Washington,
but by an accident during takeoff of the NEACP aircraft. The
mystery of precisely what went wrong with one of the most
rigorously inspected, carefully maintained aircraft in the nation
has never been solved- the FAA never properly investigated the
accident. Because an inbound missile had been detected, Vice
President Pemberton elected to try to make it to the Special
Facility at Mount Weather. Upon being informed of the President's
death and told that no retaliatory action had been taken,
Vice President Pemberton was forced to delay her departure and
remain at a secure communications facility (the radios on the
evacuation helicopter have never been considered reliable for
this purpose). From the bomb shelter under the east wing of
the White House (built during President Truman's tenure, and
never intended to withstand a direct hit), Vice President Pemberton,
after identifying herself, issued a proclamation of the existence
of a state of war (only Congress has the power to declare
war, and that body was not in session), and ordered retaliatory
strikes on the USSR. She was killed a few minutes later when
the missile detonated.
For a time, the United States had no official "National Command
Authority." Speaker of the House Munson, next in line,
was skiing in northern California. He had slipped out of his vacation
home and not left word of his destination

[Legbreaker]

... as CDAT pointed out English is descended from German.

Amongst other languages.

4127

[shrike6]

Lets talk about the elephant in the room. Did Munson kill the President and have advance knowledge of the attack?

President Tanner was killed, not by the strike on Washington,
but by an accident during takeoff of the NEACP aircraft. The
mystery of precisely what went wrong with one of the most
rigorously inspected, carefully maintained aircraft in the nation
has never been solved- the FAA never properly investigated the
accident. Because an inbound missile had been detected, Vice
President Pemberton elected to try to make it to the Special
Facility at Mount Weather. Upon being informed of the President's
death and told that no retaliatory action had been taken,
Vice President Pemberton was forced to delay her departure and
remain at a secure communications facility (the radios on the
evacuation helicopter have never been considered reliable for
this purpose). From the bomb shelter under the east wing of
the White House (built during President Truman's tenure, and
never intended to withstand a direct hit), Vice President Pemberton,
after identifying herself, issued a proclamation of the existence
of a state of war (only Congress has the power to declare
war, and that body was not in session), and ordered retaliatory
strikes on the USSR. She was killed a few minutes later when
the missile detonated.
For a time, the United States had no official "National Command
Authority." Speaker of the House Munson, next in line,
was skiing in northern California. He had slipped out of his vacation
home and not left word of his destination

I don't think so, not based off that anyways. If he had been involved I would have thought he would have been waiting by the proverbial phone. Although, that does not preclude other rogue elements within the government from doing shenanigans. Keep in mind the tragedy would never be fully investigated.