Little Girl

[Razzinold]

I'm thinking, y'know, eight-year-old white girl, middle of the ghetto, bunch of zombies, this time of night with quantum physics books? She about to start something. She's about eight years old, those books are WAY too advanced for her. If you ask me, I'd say she's up to something. And to be honest, I'd appreciate it if you eased up off my back about it.

nicely done Gotta love MIB

[Trooper Jim]

double post

[Trooper Jim]

OK i am quickly growing weary of the whole "kill the pregnant woman or child" mentality of some of your guys characters.

A pregnant woman is two lives, herself and the baby. A child is one. That is not same thing at all and I am not sure if zombies can get pregnant. (In some movies they can, but maybe someone more well versed can answer if the zombies in Dead Reign can reproduce?)

No, Zeds don’t reproduce in the traditional manner, they reproduce by killing you. But any ways this was a direct comment on a previous post, where some folks were talking about killing off a PC, that was a pregnant stripper. They sited a myriad of reasons, most equally asinine.

I kind of thought the whole point of the game is humanity surviving the zombie apocalypse and rebuilding. How can we survive as a species if you kill the future generations?

I am not on some sort of spree killing children. It's just one child who shouldn't even be alive honestly speaking. Killing her would not be "killing future genearions". By teh way, my character has children too. Many of the group I hang out with are mothers and fathers who are doing what they do exactly for the future generations.

So who decides if someone “ shouldn’t even be alive”. What if my character has spent weeks and months surviving his way through Zed infested territory. But as soon as he is spotted by a group of survivors, he is gunned down……”Well he was deep in zombie country and he shouldn’t have survived…so we shot him”. Right on that is sound logic.

My character would probably of killed anyone that tried to kill the child without investigating it first. But he has a strong personal belief in what is right and what and what is wrong.

Your character is a hypocrite and should be played as evil. For saying he has strong belief of what is right and wrong, you think it's okay to MURDER your friend just because of a mistake like that? Like people pointed out, that would probably start a gunfight and soon everyone was dead. That's not really a thing good aligned character would do. Even if for some reason this wouldn't cause rebute from you killing a fellow person, I'd make you become evil in aligment for balant murder and your reputation would be tarnished for ages to come.

But even if for some reason no one bats an eye of balant murder and such, you've just wasted a person who can actually do something and you have now two bodies. I'd like to see you explain this to the family of the person you killed with your good guy

"Well, Billy killed a girl who may have been a zombie. I didn't like that, so I killed him. Then again, I have strong belief in what is right and wrong."

Actually he is an evil alignment. But did you read what I said? WITH OUT INVESTIGATING!!!!!!!! If she is determined to be a zombie, yes kill it. But if she is a survivor, then no, don’t kill her. The Players should be resourceful enough to come up with a way to conduct the investigation while minimizing risk to themselves. That is sort part of the point of Role-Playing games, isn’t it?
You are right about that Billy’s killing causing strife in the group. But if Billy is a homicidal maniac that kills everyone he sees, before he figures out if they are alive or not. He probably won’t be missed much.

And as a GM, there would be consequences for the "shoot first" mentality. Oh wait that child you cleaved in two with your chainsaw.........yea she turned out to be the missing child of another reaper gang or surviving military unit. And guess what, her father and his group were looking for the child and rounded the corner in time to watch you MURDER her, oops. Yea that might lead to a tense moment or two.

Reapers value life over everything but despise zombies enough to choose death always over becoming one. A reaper would understand if you killed the girl, it was not a pleasant action but if she was a risk of becoming one or may have already been one, they'd probably kill her by themself anyway.

It would really depend on the reaper group. And for S and Gs i would be willing to bet that some half arsed biker thugs would probably lose that fight.

There's no organized miliatry units. Again, the army is MIA.

You are right. The Army as an effective military force is nonexistent. But since there is a class in the book called “Apocalyptic SOLDIER” I am sure that at least 1 former military operative is alive. In fact I would venture a guess that there would be a few small groups of former soldiers/Marines/Airman/Sailors that might have banded together to defend their families or communities. And since old habits/ skills die hard, they would probably use military tactics, equipment, chain of command…… at least on a smaller scale. Not to mention I am sure several former cops and SWAT members would probably do the same. So yes the 10th mountain Div. isn’t going to be marching on Yonkers to push the Zeds back, but a squad or 2 may be running around trying to survive and maybe help out others that they find.

Or maybe the child has some kind of special ability or knowledge the group would find useful. Perhaps she has some psi powers that allow her to pass by zeds undetected. Perhaps she also knows the location of some nearby supplies or survivors. Just sayin.........

I am going to break your bubble again but kids are not useful like in movies and comics really. If anything, they take tons of time and nurture for them to grow up into strong people. In a time of zombie apocalypse, neither is really all that avaivable. To get a girl, would require a lot of time from some other survivors as well as more mouths to feed. And to prevent her from being totally useless in later years, time must be spent on educating and training her. Again, consuming time and resources.

Ok so kill all the kids. I mean all they do is eat and poop. They have no useful skills at all.

I also checked (all three of the books released) and there's no psionic powers anywhere in Dead Reign. (Something that genuinely surprised me, but then again it's more down to the earth and realistic) Plus, there's a high chance of finding the supplies on your own. In other words, they do not contribute anything really.

Maybe I am playing in a setting truer to the original incarnation of the game. Check out the Rifter articles. They are actually pretty good.

Yeah, basically it comes down to shoot the girl, ignore the girl, or restrain the girl if possible to do safely. Personally, I'd err on her being a child zombie as the chances of a little girl surviving on her own alone in a zombie apocalypse without some kind of training or guidance is near zero. The whole humanitarian "don't shoot the girl, she might be an innocent living being just wondering the street looking for mommy" doesn't hold up given the scenario we are dealing with.

Likewise, people with that kind of non-logical humanitarian outlook are the people that didn't survive the zombie apocalypse. Why? Because the zombies ate them when they probably thought the exact same thing about a beaten up loved one or a neighbor. In fact, doesn't it make this a rather clear point in the main book somewhere?

Yes, from page 8 and forward we get the details of the little girls being killed and such. People with non logical humanitarian outlook (I am totally stealing that description since it's awesome) would NOT be survivors, they would have been one of the first people to be infected. The idea that someone playing perfect "boysocut" would survive the entire apocalypse unscratched is just illogical.

You should especially read page 10 if you're thinking about army going around killing zombies and saving little girls as viable options.

Again……..
You are right. The Army as an effective military force is nonexistent. But since there is a class in the book called “Apocalyptic SOLDIER” I am sure that at least 1 former military operative is alive. In fact I would venture a guess that there would be a few small groups of former soldiers/Marines/Airman/Sailors that might have banded together to defend their families or communities. And since old habits/ skills die hard, they would probably use military tactics, equipment, chain of command…… at least on a smaller scale. Not to mention I am sure several former cops and SWAT members would probably do the same. So yes the 10 mountain Div. isn’t going to be marching on Yonkers to push the Zeds back, but a squad or 2 may be running around trying to survive and maybe help out others that they find.[/quote]

[Colt47]

Trooper Jim I agree with you that children are not useless, though keep in mind Dobergirl is strictly speaking within the context of the immediate zombie survival situation. I don't think she's going to disagree with you that children are good for making sure there's actual people still around in the future who are ideally not death cultists. Also, I understand that her statement "shouldn't be alive" seems overly harsh. It's missing the necessary context to properly frame the statement so it is coming off as being an overall outlook instead of a situational one.

The key difference between your example of having someone surviving zombie infested territory for weeks or months and the given one, is that the character in question is likely at least a teen who is fully capable of communication. Likewise, this isn't a world where a person is going to go for months without seeing another living being, as even in the zombie infested reaches of the city there are people running around trying to find supplies, starting up death cults, acting as guides or doom sayers, and other craziness. If your character ran into people who are survivors and expects not to get gunned down, he better be willing to at least show some sort of indication that he isn't a mindless undead and NOT stand dumbfounded near a street light after dark.

Also, if your character in question isn't capable of communication, then your character is going to die as that is one of the few things that allows people to actually identify who is an undead and who isn't; especially in low light scenarios like this one.

[Trooper Jim]

Trooper Jim I agree with you that children are not useless, though keep in mind Dobergirl is strictly speaking within the context of the immediate zombie survival situation. I don't think she's going to disagree with you that children are good for making sure there's actual people still around in the future who are ideally not death cultists. Also, I understand that her statement "shouldn't be alive" seems overly harsh. It's missing the necessary context to properly frame the statement so it is coming off as being an overall outlook instead of a situational one.

I understand your point. I am just trying to get people to move past the mindless kill it all mentality. once you do that, your RPG experience will improve 10 fold.

The key difference between your example of having someone surviving zombie infested territory for weeks or months and the given one, is that the character in question is likely at least a teen who is fully capable of communication. Likewise, this isn't a world where a person is going to go for months without seeing another living being, as even in the zombie infested reaches of the city there are people running around trying to find supplies, starting up death cults, acting as guides or doom sayers, and other craziness. If your character ran into people who are survivors and expects not to get gunned down, he better be willing to at least show some sort of indication that he isn't a mindless undead and NOT stand dumbfounded near a street light after dark.

Also, if your character in question isn't capable of communication, then your character is going to die as that is one of the few things that allows people to actually identify who is an undead and who isn't; especially in low light scenarios like this one.

Very true, the character in question is a former CIA SAD operative. So he is fully capable of combat, stealth and even communication.

[Trooper Jim]

Trooper jim, that's the whole problem .. You're not playing Dead Reign in a setting that is actually how DEAD REIGN (the ks Version) is supposed to work.

heck the DR Zombies are super badasses that destroy anything short of super soldiers in minutes.
Not even Superheroes would last in Dead reign because of all the nigh invulnerabilities they have.
Most people I met that have played Dead Reign just use the rifter version of them period.
but you never specified this in your original post.

Neither did the OP. But the KS version is ridiculous. The Zeds are way way to tough, and the weapons have been nerfed to high hell. As written it is almost unplayable. I am not going to enjoy a game where the character i have spent 2 hours making, get whacked 20 min. Into the game. I think it stems from Kevin not knowing the first thing about the genre.

[Ravenwing]

Trooper jim, that's the whole problem .. You're not playing Dead Reign in a setting that is actually how DEAD REIGN (the ks Version) is supposed to work.

heck the DR Zombies are super badasses that destroy anything short of super soldiers in minutes.
Not even Superheroes would last in Dead reign because of all the nigh invulnerabilities they have.
Most people I met that have played Dead Reign just use the rifter version of them period.
but you never specified this in your original post.

Neither did the OP. But the KS version is ridiculous. The Zeds are way way to tough, and the weapons have been nerfed to high hell. As written it is almost unplayable. I am not going to enjoy a game where the character i have spent 2 hours making, get whacked 20 min. Into the game. I think it stems from Kevin not knowing the first thing about the genre.

Or deciding to ignore a good idea and replace it with several bad ones..... I'm looking at.

Zed AR
No Zed Virus.
Poorly written Weapons Section.
Reapers.
Houndmaster.
Shepard of the Damn.
Half-living.
Scrounger.
Down playing the Death Cults role in the Zed'pocylpse.

[Colt47]

Which rifter has the dead reign stuff?

[Ravenwing]

Number 40.

[cornholioprime]

You and your group are heading back to your comunity after going out and getting supplies. It just turned into night and the street lights have just turned on. You hear a sound behind you and you turn around and you see an outline of a little girl not to far from your group. Its to dark for you to tell if she is a zombie or not but she just stands there and stares at you. What do you do?

Frankly, based on the behavior patterns of the Zombies in the various books, there's no way a Zombie of ANY sort, besides a Mock Zombie, will just stand there. And even in the case of the Mock Zombie, the LAST thing that he/she will want to do, is actually look like they're undead by just standing and staring blankly.

Mind you, I realize that I am saying that with "Meta-knowledge" of how the various Zombie types act; then again, I could also get the relevant information from Brad's Zombie Guide, so I'm not exactly cheating here.

But even if I didn't have his guide handy, I would have presumably fought enough of these guys at that point to realize that chances are very good, that the little girl in front of me is not a Zombie.
Of course, I would take every quick precaution that I could and attempt to do a quick check, and like other posters here it might very likely involve the use of fire.
(I get to assume that the life auras of me and my group are ALREADY blazing in the night to any Zeds in the vicinity, and therefore a little more light show ain't gonna make things any better or worse.)

[Trooper Jim]

Trooper jim, that's the whole problem .. You're not playing Dead Reign in a setting that is actually how DEAD REIGN (the ks Version) is supposed to work.

heck the DR Zombies are super badasses that destroy anything short of super soldiers in minutes.
Not even Superheroes would last in Dead reign because of all the nigh invulnerabilities they have.
Most people I met that have played Dead Reign just use the rifter version of them period.
but you never specified this in your original post.

Neither did the OP. But the KS version is ridiculous. The Zeds are way way to tough, and the weapons have been nerfed to high hell. As written it is almost unplayable. I am not going to enjoy a game where the character i have spent 2 hours making, get whacked 20 min. Into the game. I think it stems from Kevin not knowing the first thing about the genre.

Or deciding to ignore a good idea and replace it with several bad ones..... I'm looking at.

Zed AR
No Zed Virus.
Poorly written Weapons Section.
Reapers.
Houndmaster.
Shepard of the Damn.
Half-living.
Scrounger.
Down playing the Death Cults role in the Zed'pocylpse.

I am Trooper Jim; and I approve this message!

[Ravenwing]

Number 40.

Rifter 45

Nope it's Rifter number 40, unless my copy is a misprint or something. It has the old Africa Cover on it, a really cool PFRPG Article on Barbarians (Part II of this article), the Dead Reign stuff, and a CS Adventure Spoils of war.

[gaaahhhh]

Number 40.

Rifter 45

Nope it's Rifter number 40, unless my copy is a misprint or something. It has the old Africa Cover on it, a really cool PFRPG Article on Barbarians (Part II of this article), the Dead Reign stuff, and a CS Adventure Spoils of war.

It's 40 AND 45.

[batlchip]

I think that some of you are forgetting the factors of shock or trauma that she might have gone through.The idea of a child running around like Newt in Aliens would be possible.Some children would very quickly learn how to survive.I can offer some examples like children who live on the streets or in war zones (like saravo)

[dargo83]

Revan i agree with 110%

[Traska]

So did I. Which is why I posted a paraphrased quote of that scene.

Bonus: the agent's name is Zed.

[Talmonis]

Draw a bead on her forehead with a crossbow or 3, shine her with a flashlight and try to get her to respond. If she even looks remotely infected, or tries to moan, put bolts in her head. If she seems alive, and responds normally (including sign language, or any kind of hand signals), rescue and evac.

[Dobergirl]

Before getting to Trooper Jim, I'd like to go back to Horizon911 who's post I finally had time to figure out.

I think for me it's a moral conundrum - for you, in terms of game play, you seem to shoot her as the status quo procedure to follow, no asking questions first.

Morally talking, NOT shooting would be really, really dick move to all your friends. And that misplaced moral that has no place in zombie apocalypse just cost the lives of all of you ever knew and loved that were traveling with you. Your loved one just got bit and three of your friends died. And you still had to kill the kid who turned out to be zombie, only now instead of one body there are four bodies and your loved one is developing nasty gangrea in the bite wound. And that is in best possible case

How is that the best case? Wouldn't the best case be that you took a second to look at the girl, she was human, and you continued along on your merry way?

If she were a human, survivor in place like that and acting like that, I'd start becoming even more worried. She'd most likely be part of bandits or worse, death cult.

Till you find the girl is one of your friends cousins and still quite human...

That is 100% impossible and the entire idea is ludicrous at best and insulting to intelligence at worst.

How is this impossible? People may have family all in one area, or scattered about the world. Are the odds that the random little girl you're encountering are related to you? Probably not. But certainly not impossible. I think the point was that before you just start shooting (or clubbing in your case), maybe it would do some good to take a quick look at your target before you kill it. And that should not equate to you, or your group, dying.

Yes, it's impossible. I rolled that my family is dead, and that EVERYONE who I knew before the zombie apocalypse is dead. I've since made new family.

Do the zombie girls have some sort of amazing leaping attack so that if you get close to check (or heck, even take a second to aim a torch on her), she leaps?

Yes. You get too close, you are going to get bitten in nasty way.

If she's a sloucher, mock, or thinker, I'd imagine you'd be able to get away with shining a flashlight on her from 10 feet away and still have enough time to retreat or engage if she turned out to be a zombie. If she was a runner, she probably would have begun sprinting at you as soon as she saw your PPE, so this conversation would be moot in that case.

Pretty zombies and mock zombies wouldn't be able to be recognized that far away.

Frankly, if the zombies are really that powerful, then it doesn't matter if you shoot. They will kill you regardless.

And if they aren't that powerful, exactly where's the reason for shooting first coming from?

Um, have you even read the roleplaying book? Zombies ARE more powerful than average person. And I didn't say I'd shoot, I'd bash their head with my crowbar that I'm skilled with, since I'm a reaper.

Of course, killing zombies is what I do, of course I can take her down. Zombies are really powerful and dangerous but reapers are professional zombie slayers.

Unless you toss out some crappy rolls. Even reapers can be killed.

Yes, I know. Which is why reapers never hunt alone, there's always a group of them to make sure even if there's one person "having bad day" the odds of five others is very unlikely.

The reason people even got infected in the first place was because they had "self-control." The reason the entire world is still alive is because people are shooting first, asking questions later. This is actually all very clear if you actually read the manual. To quote Brad Ashley, the leader of the Reapers; "Do it fast and know it is the right thing to be done. This may sound heartless, but it is a necessity. Hesitate and more lives may be lost, including your own."

Heh, I'd like that Brad Ashley quote to read "Do it fast and know *big blood splotch from a head shot on the page*" as someone shot him because for an instant they suspected he was a zed and shot first, rather than asking questions.

No one would think of Brad as zombie. No one.

The entire idea of someone being able to kill him like that is just retarded enough but for a human to do it thinking he's a zombie?! That is the... Dumbest thing I have ever read!


By the way, thank you for such a classy way of killing off the savior of humanity.

I think the point was that if you're going to simply see a figure, assume its a hostile, and take measures to kill it before verifying this, that it would be equally possible to see your heroic Brad from a distance, not want to take a chance, and take him out before seeing who/what he really was.

So, you see a person in campment full of reapers, writing a journal inside a tent and you assume they're zombie?

Makes sense to me!

What kind of a kid has NO reaction to group of highly trained and highly armed people who suddenly spot them? I tell you, a zombie that was once a kid.

Depends, I guess. If a scientific study came out saying humans, particular children, do commonly have a freeze reflex (like many slow animals do, as if your not faster than the preditor it's actually worse to run)

I mean, if in your game world normal kids never act that way, okay, you can have it any way you want in your game world.

A kid with freeze reflex is equilavent of reacting to a bright flash, they bring their hands up and are startled and shaking and most likely whimpering. Not standing in darkness with cold lifeless eyes and in silence.

Trauma does all sorts of things to people, with varying degrees of reaction and severity. I wouldn't pigeonhole reactions like this unless you don't mind killing a bunch of shell shocked, innocent people. Who knows how many scared doctors you might mow down, or bash in.

Notice the key words being here "scared doctors" and "shocked."

These are human emotions, reactions you'd expect and you'd see. The girl had no reaction at all. There's a world of difference.

OK i am quickly growing weary of the whole "kill the pregnant woman or child" mentality of some of your guys characters.

A pregnant woman is two lives, herself and the baby. A child is one. That is not same thing at all and I am not sure if zombies can get pregnant. (In some movies they can, but maybe someone more well versed can answer if the zombies in Dead Reign can reproduce?)

No, Zeds don’t reproduce in the traditional manner, they reproduce by killing you. But any ways this was a direct comment on a previous post, where some folks were talking about killing off a PC, that was a pregnant stripper. They sited a myriad of reasons, most equally asinine.

Again, a pregnant woman is two lives, it is not equal comparision and seeing as zombies can't get pregnant you say, it's clear that the person would be a human from the belly alone.


That wouldn't put her in clear yet though, could just as well be any of the human baddies.

I kind of thought the whole point of the game is humanity surviving the zombie apocalypse and rebuilding. How can we survive as a species if you kill the future generations?

I am not on some sort of spree killing children. It's just one child who shouldn't even be alive honestly speaking. Killing her would not be "killing future genearions". By teh way, my character has children too. Many of the group I hang out with are mothers and fathers who are doing what they do exactly for the future generations.

So who decides if someone “ shouldn’t even be alive”. What if my character has spent weeks and months surviving his way through Zed infested territory. But as soon as he is spotted by a group of survivors, he is gunned down……”Well he was deep in zombie country and he shouldn’t have survived…so we shot him”. Right on that is sound logic.

Majority decides. If majority say we shoot, we shoot. If minority say we shoot, we investigate. But I'm going to be honest, in almost all the situations shooting is almost always the majority.

My character would probably of killed anyone that tried to kill the child without investigating it first. But he has a strong personal belief in what is right and what and what is wrong.

Your character is a hypocrite and should be played as evil. For saying he has strong belief of what is right and wrong, you think it's okay to MURDER your friend just because of a mistake like that? Like people pointed out, that would probably start a gunfight and soon everyone was dead. That's not really a thing good aligned character would do. Even if for some reason this wouldn't cause rebute from you killing a fellow person, I'd make you become evil in aligment for balant murder and your reputation would be tarnished for ages to come.

But even if for some reason no one bats an eye of balant murder and such, you've just wasted a person who can actually do something and you have now two bodies. I'd like to see you explain this to the family of the person you killed with your good guy

"Well, Billy killed a girl who may have been a zombie. I didn't like that, so I killed him. Then again, I have strong belief in what is right and wrong."

Actually he is an evil alignment. But did you read what I said? WITH OUT INVESTIGATING!!!!!!!! If she is determined to be a zombie, yes kill it. But if she is a survivor, then no, don’t kill her. The Players should be resourceful enough to come up with a way to conduct the investigation while minimizing risk to themselves. That is sort part of the point of Role-Playing games, isn’t it?
You are right about that Billy’s killing causing strife in the group. But if Billy is a homicidal maniac that kills everyone he sees, before he figures out if they are alive or not. He probably won’t be missed much.

So wait, he's an evil aligment character who has strong belif in what is right and wrong? How the hell does that even work?


There are ways to conduct investigation but honestly, a creepy little girl who does not say a single word and just stare is most likely either a zombie or something worse. There's no reason for more ivnestigation. No real child would EVER react like that again.

And as a GM, there would be consequences for the "shoot first" mentality. Oh wait that child you cleaved in two with your chainsaw.........yea she turned out to be the missing child of another reaper gang or surviving military unit. And guess what, her father and his group were looking for the child and rounded the corner in time to watch you MURDER her, oops. Yea that might lead to a tense moment or two.

Reapers value life over everything but despise zombies enough to choose death always over becoming one. A reaper would understand if you killed the girl, it was not a pleasant action but if she was a risk of becoming one or may have already been one, they'd probably kill her by themself anyway.

It would really depend on the reaper group. And for S and Gs i would be willing to bet that some half arsed biker thugs would probably lose that fight.

I have no idea what you're talking about with the S and G's, is that some sort of gang talk?

And all reapers again, value life over others. It says so right in the book that they'd rather kill themself or their loved one than to see them as zombie. Again, a fellow reaper would totally believe another reaper having done "the right thing."

There's no organized miliatry units. Again, the army is MIA.

You are right. The Army as an effective military force is nonexistent. But since there is a class in the book called “Apocalyptic SOLDIER” I am sure that at least 1 former military operative is alive. In fact I would venture a guess that there would be a few small groups of former soldiers/Marines/Airman/Sailors that might have banded together to defend their families or communities. And since old habits/ skills die hard, they would probably use military tactics, equipment, chain of command…… at least on a smaller scale. Not to mention I am sure several former cops and SWAT members would probably do the same. So yes the 10th mountain Div. isn’t going to be marching on Yonkers to push the Zeds back, but a squad or 2 may be running around trying to survive and maybe help out others that they find.

I'm going to quote the book

"While one may think these soldiers left on their own might degenerate into warlords, gang leaders and thugs, most have not. Instead they are highly motivated to maintain order, save lives and kill zombies."

Notice emphasis on the bolded area? Now, tell me how going to gunfight with reapers would help save lives or kill zombies? In fact, I'm pretty sure it'd cost lives and make killing zombies harder.

Or maybe the child has some kind of special ability or knowledge the group would find useful. Perhaps she has some psi powers that allow her to pass by zeds undetected. Perhaps she also knows the location of some nearby supplies or survivors. Just sayin.........

I am going to break your bubble again but kids are not useful like in movies and comics really. If anything, they take tons of time and nurture for them to grow up into strong people. In a time of zombie apocalypse, neither is really all that avaivable. To get a girl, would require a lot of time from some other survivors as well as more mouths to feed. And to prevent her from being totally useless in later years, time must be spent on educating and training her. Again, consuming time and resources.

Ok so kill all the kids. I mean all they do is eat and poop. They have no useful skills at all.

The situation of finding impossible survivor is totally diffent, please don't make comparisions like that.

I also checked (all three of the books released) and there's no psionic powers anywhere in Dead Reign. (Something that genuinely surprised me, but then again it's more down to the earth and realistic) Plus, there's a high chance of finding the supplies on your own. In other words, they do not contribute anything really.

Maybe I am playing in a setting truer to the original incarnation of the game. Check out the Rifter articles. They are actually pretty good.

I don't play Rifter. I play Dead Reign. There's no electro buzzo weapons or such anywhere. You're in the wrong place and arguing using logic that doesn't apply to this game.

That's like me going to the fantasy section and complaining why I can't use my machine gun to mow down the orcs.

Yeah, basically it comes down to shoot the girl, ignore the girl, or restrain the girl if possible to do safely. Personally, I'd err on her being a child zombie as the chances of a little girl surviving on her own alone in a zombie apocalypse without some kind of training or guidance is near zero. The whole humanitarian "don't shoot the girl, she might be an innocent living being just wondering the street looking for mommy" doesn't hold up given the scenario we are dealing with.

Likewise, people with that kind of non-logical humanitarian outlook are the people that didn't survive the zombie apocalypse. Why? Because the zombies ate them when they probably thought the exact same thing about a beaten up loved one or a neighbor. In fact, doesn't it make this a rather clear point in the main book somewhere?

Yes, from page 8 and forward we get the details of the little girls being killed and such. People with non logical humanitarian outlook (I am totally stealing that description since it's awesome) would NOT be survivors, they would have been one of the first people to be infected. The idea that someone playing perfect "boysocut" would survive the entire apocalypse unscratched is just illogical.

You should especially read page 10 if you're thinking about army going around killing zombies and saving little girls as viable options.

Again……..
You are right. The Army as an effective military force is nonexistent. But since there is a class in the book called “Apocalyptic SOLDIER” I am sure that at least 1 former military operative is alive. In fact I would venture a guess that there would be a few small groups of former soldiers/Marines/Airman/Sailors that might have banded together to defend their families or communities. And since old habits/ skills die hard, they would probably use military tactics, equipment, chain of command…… at least on a smaller scale. Not to mention I am sure several former cops and SWAT members would probably do the same. So yes the 10 mountain Div. isn’t going to be marching on Yonkers to push the Zeds back, but a squad or 2 may be running around trying to survive and maybe help out others that they find.

Yes, yes, that's basically what I meant. Honestly, the miliatry is less miliatry than reapers at the moment because the reapers are more banded and have better equipment that they've scavenged, whereareas the best army weaponry and such are the ones that were initially lost and most of them have either become useless or run out of ammo by now.

Trooper Jim I agree with you that children are not useless, though keep in mind Dobergirl is strictly speaking within the context of the immediate zombie survival situation. I don't think she's going to disagree with you that children are good for making sure there's actual people still around in the future who are ideally not death cultists. Also, I understand that her statement "shouldn't be alive" seems overly harsh. It's missing the necessary context to properly frame the statement so it is coming off as being an overall outlook instead of a situational one.

I understand your point. I am just trying to get people to move past the mindless kill it all mentality. once you do that, your RPG experience will improve 10 fold.

I don't kill all. Again, this entire scenario is not possible on any level without it being a trap or zombie or worse. Seriously, no matter how you try to think, there's no getting past it, this entire scenario is built around that the girl should be killed.

Trooper jim, that's the whole problem .. You're not playing Dead Reign in a setting that is actually how DEAD REIGN (the ks Version) is supposed to work.

heck the DR Zombies are super badasses that destroy anything short of super soldiers in minutes.
Not even Superheroes would last in Dead reign because of all the nigh invulnerabilities they have.
Most people I met that have played Dead Reign just use the rifter version of them period.
but you never specified this in your original post.

Neither did the OP. But the KS version is ridiculous. The Zeds are way way to tough, and the weapons have been nerfed to high hell. As written it is almost unplayable. I am not going to enjoy a game where the character i have spent 2 hours making, get whacked 20 min. Into the game. I think it stems from Kevin not knowing the first thing about the genre.

Or, you have no idea how to play it and go around playing rambo or rifter frenzy with your powers you don't have. Of course you get killed! You are doing it wrong!

[Gamer]

So now Dobergirl runs Palladium books and gets to tell people what they can and can't use from the Rifters.
so is the Rifter going to be stopped getting published now just because she says it's wrong to use the Rifters?
She gets to say Trooper Jim is doing it wrong but is playing the Reapers completely wrong herself.
Talk about being a hypocrite, Shes' not playing Reapers as they are supposed to be she's just playing Murderous thugs with Reaper abilities.

This post screams it loud and clear

You put many lives at stake for absolute no reason. In fact, you do worse than that, you may doom entire areas of survivors, including indirectly be responsible for deaths of countless other children by letting yourself and your team mates die.

The value of the child is absolute nothing compared to how big of a loss it'd be if a reaper would die. The effects would be tremendous, longspanning and immediate. There is just no justification for putting them to risk for something like that

So Reapers from how Dobergirl runs Reapers they went from Reapers aka Knights on bikes to murderous Thugs or Death knights when exactly? I don't know of any new books that place the Reapers in the Shoot first and might ask questions later about thier innocence later catagory.

Excerpts from the Reaper description.

People who take the Reaper name are dead serious about killing zombies and dedicated to riding the road in the quest to help others, which makes them very much knights on motorcycles.

Alternately, a lone Reaper, a pair of Reapers, or a Reaper and 1-3 prospects under his or her wing can be found among a mixed group of heroes and survivors fighting the zombie horde and keeping people safe from the undead.

Reapers are quick to volunteer to hold a defensive line in an attempt to kill as many zombies as possible, while others work at saving lives, getting supplies etc.

The trick is rescuing those in need now, and keeping people alive until later.

A Reaper is a zombie exterminator and rescuer of the innocent, that's his stock in trade.

Where in the fluff in the description comes close to justifying this psychotic episode.

The value of the child is absolute nothing compared to how big of a loss it'd be if a reaper would die. The effects would be tremendous, longspanning and immediate. There is just no justification for putting them to risk for something like that

That's the only way to describe it about a class whose alignment and OCC is geared towards saving people and not just executing them for absolutely no reason, or else coming up with a pansy assed comment about it's too risky?
If dealing with a little girl is too risky then don't play a OCC whose alignment and OCC is geared towards saving them and also stop making them sound all big and bad assed if dealing with little children is too risky.
Dealing with fanatics wearing suicide vests and trying to separate them from the innocents is risky and if soldiers could handle dealing with that risk on a daily basis then getting a PID on a little girl who may or may not be a zombie or is a death cult plant is not, especially not for big bad assed Reapers'.
You can't save lives or help people if you are against taking risks.
If you won't take the risks then don't play an OCC that says that's part of what you do.
if everything you post is pretty much against the OCC and their alignment, you are definitely doing it wrong.
It really makes those posts an insult to intelligence when you are adamant about others not playing the game correctly.

This was once a very good roleplay subject, now it's not worth looking at anymore, I even feel quite a few IQ points light after reading one persons posts now not to mention insulted.

So to recap,
Reapers executing kids without a PID is never evil in fact its down right rude of you not to,
It's too risky to save lives of others, its a trap.
And Using Palladium books Rifter magazine content in Palladium Books games is wrong.
Gotcha


PID = Positive Identification
I have been injured in the service in the risk of getting a PID on subjects to determine friend or foe, and still took those risks afterwords and would continue to do so now, saving one life is worth the risk.
in an RPG that risk is good roleplay material, you just don't get the same good well done feelings afterwords
Ask any cop who goes in on a domestic disturbance call or a fireman on a house fire.
It doesn't change because the baddies are zombies in a rpg if you are going to play the class that is out to save people then take the risk to save them that's part of what makes that OCC what it is.
If you don't want to play with the big dogs taking risks then play it safe with the puppy OCCs just don't insult the OCC by turning them into psychotic killers.

[Oberoth]

I agree with almost everything Gamer said.

Indeed, alignment and that particular OCC REQUIRES that they check first. I mean really it only takes several more moments to get a PID anyway.

[Ravenwing]

Before getting to Trooper Jim, I'd like to go back to Horizon911 who's post I finally had time to figure out.

I think for me it's a moral conundrum - for you, in terms of game play, you seem to shoot her as the status quo procedure to follow, no asking questions first.

Morally talking, NOT shooting would be really, really dick move to all your friends. And that misplaced moral that has no place in zombie apocalypse just cost the lives of all of you ever knew and loved that were traveling with you. Your loved one just got bit and three of your friends died. And you still had to kill the kid who turned out to be zombie, only now instead of one body there are four bodies and your loved one is developing nasty gangrea in the bite wound. And that is in best possible case

How is that the best case? Wouldn't the best case be that you took a second to look at the girl, she was human, and you continued along on your merry way?

If she were a human, survivor in place like that and acting like that, I'd start becoming even more worried. She'd most likely be part of bandits or worse, death cult.

Till you find the girl is one of your friends cousins and still quite human...

That is 100% impossible and the entire idea is ludicrous at best and insulting to intelligence at worst.

How is this impossible? People may have family all in one area, or scattered about the world. Are the odds that the random little girl you're encountering are related to you? Probably not. But certainly not impossible. I think the point was that before you just start shooting (or clubbing in your case), maybe it would do some good to take a quick look at your target before you kill it. And that should not equate to you, or your group, dying.

Yes, it's impossible. I rolled that my family is dead, and that EVERYONE who I knew before the zombie apocalypse is dead. I've since made new family.

Do the zombie girls have some sort of amazing leaping attack so that if you get close to check (or heck, even take a second to aim a torch on her), she leaps?

Yes. You get too close, you are going to get bitten in nasty way.

If she's a sloucher, mock, or thinker, I'd imagine you'd be able to get away with shining a flashlight on her from 10 feet away and still have enough time to retreat or engage if she turned out to be a zombie. If she was a runner, she probably would have begun sprinting at you as soon as she saw your PPE, so this conversation would be moot in that case.

Pretty zombies and mock zombies wouldn't be able to be recognized that far away.

Frankly, if the zombies are really that powerful, then it doesn't matter if you shoot. They will kill you regardless.

And if they aren't that powerful, exactly where's the reason for shooting first coming from?

Um, have you even read the roleplaying book? Zombies ARE more powerful than average person. And I didn't say I'd shoot, I'd bash their head with my crowbar that I'm skilled with, since I'm a reaper.

Of course, killing zombies is what I do, of course I can take her down. Zombies are really powerful and dangerous but reapers are professional zombie slayers.

Unless you toss out some crappy rolls. Even reapers can be killed.

Yes, I know. Which is why reapers never hunt alone, there's always a group of them to make sure even if there's one person "having bad day" the odds of five others is very unlikely.

The reason people even got infected in the first place was because they had "self-control." The reason the entire world is still alive is because people are shooting first, asking questions later. This is actually all very clear if you actually read the manual. To quote Brad Ashley, the leader of the Reapers; "Do it fast and know it is the right thing to be done. This may sound heartless, but it is a necessity. Hesitate and more lives may be lost, including your own."

Heh, I'd like that Brad Ashley quote to read "Do it fast and know *big blood splotch from a head shot on the page*" as someone shot him because for an instant they suspected he was a zed and shot first, rather than asking questions.

No one would think of Brad as zombie. No one.

The entire idea of someone being able to kill him like that is just retarded enough but for a human to do it thinking he's a zombie?! That is the... Dumbest thing I have ever read!


By the way, thank you for such a classy way of killing off the savior of humanity.

I think the point was that if you're going to simply see a figure, assume its a hostile, and take measures to kill it before verifying this, that it would be equally possible to see your heroic Brad from a distance, not want to take a chance, and take him out before seeing who/what he really was.

So, you see a person in campment full of reapers, writing a journal inside a tent and you assume they're zombie?

Makes sense to me!

What kind of a kid has NO reaction to group of highly trained and highly armed people who suddenly spot them? I tell you, a zombie that was once a kid.

Depends, I guess. If a scientific study came out saying humans, particular children, do commonly have a freeze reflex (like many slow animals do, as if your not faster than the preditor it's actually worse to run)

I mean, if in your game world normal kids never act that way, okay, you can have it any way you want in your game world.

A kid with freeze reflex is equilavent of reacting to a bright flash, they bring their hands up and are startled and shaking and most likely whimpering. Not standing in darkness with cold lifeless eyes and in silence.

Trauma does all sorts of things to people, with varying degrees of reaction and severity. I wouldn't pigeonhole reactions like this unless you don't mind killing a bunch of shell shocked, innocent people. Who knows how many scared doctors you might mow down, or bash in.

Notice the key words being here "scared doctors" and "shocked."

These are human emotions, reactions you'd expect and you'd see. The girl had no reaction at all. There's a world of difference.

OK i am quickly growing weary of the whole "kill the pregnant woman or child" mentality of some of your guys characters.

A pregnant woman is two lives, herself and the baby. A child is one. That is not same thing at all and I am not sure if zombies can get pregnant. (In some movies they can, but maybe someone more well versed can answer if the zombies in Dead Reign can reproduce?)

No, Zeds don’t reproduce in the traditional manner, they reproduce by killing you. But any ways this was a direct comment on a previous post, where some folks were talking about killing off a PC, that was a pregnant stripper. They sited a myriad of reasons, most equally asinine.

Again, a pregnant woman is two lives, it is not equal comparision and seeing as zombies can't get pregnant you say, it's clear that the person would be a human from the belly alone.


That wouldn't put her in clear yet though, could just as well be any of the human baddies.

I kind of thought the whole point of the game is humanity surviving the zombie apocalypse and rebuilding. How can we survive as a species if you kill the future generations?

I am not on some sort of spree killing children. It's just one child who shouldn't even be alive honestly speaking. Killing her would not be "killing future genearions". By teh way, my character has children too. Many of the group I hang out with are mothers and fathers who are doing what they do exactly for the future generations.

So who decides if someone “ shouldn’t even be alive”. What if my character has spent weeks and months surviving his way through Zed infested territory. But as soon as he is spotted by a group of survivors, he is gunned down……”Well he was deep in zombie country and he shouldn’t have survived…so we shot him”. Right on that is sound logic.

Majority decides. If majority say we shoot, we shoot. If minority say we shoot, we investigate. But I'm going to be honest, in almost all the situations shooting is almost always the majority.

My character would probably of killed anyone that tried to kill the child without investigating it first. But he has a strong personal belief in what is right and what and what is wrong.

Your character is a hypocrite and should be played as evil. For saying he has strong belief of what is right and wrong, you think it's okay to MURDER your friend just because of a mistake like that? Like people pointed out, that would probably start a gunfight and soon everyone was dead. That's not really a thing good aligned character would do. Even if for some reason this wouldn't cause rebute from you killing a fellow person, I'd make you become evil in aligment for balant murder and your reputation would be tarnished for ages to come.

But even if for some reason no one bats an eye of balant murder and such, you've just wasted a person who can actually do something and you have now two bodies. I'd like to see you explain this to the family of the person you killed with your good guy

"Well, Billy killed a girl who may have been a zombie. I didn't like that, so I killed him. Then again, I have strong belief in what is right and wrong."

Actually he is an evil alignment. But did you read what I said? WITH OUT INVESTIGATING!!!!!!!! If she is determined to be a zombie, yes kill it. But if she is a survivor, then no, don’t kill her. The Players should be resourceful enough to come up with a way to conduct the investigation while minimizing risk to themselves. That is sort part of the point of Role-Playing games, isn’t it?
You are right about that Billy’s killing causing strife in the group. But if Billy is a homicidal maniac that kills everyone he sees, before he figures out if they are alive or not. He probably won’t be missed much.

So wait, he's an evil aligment character who has strong belif in what is right and wrong? How the hell does that even work?


There are ways to conduct investigation but honestly, a creepy little girl who does not say a single word and just stare is most likely either a zombie or something worse. There's no reason for more ivnestigation. No real child would EVER react like that again.

And as a GM, there would be consequences for the "shoot first" mentality. Oh wait that child you cleaved in two with your chainsaw.........yea she turned out to be the missing child of another reaper gang or surviving military unit. And guess what, her father and his group were looking for the child and rounded the corner in time to watch you MURDER her, oops. Yea that might lead to a tense moment or two.

Reapers value life over everything but despise zombies enough to choose death always over becoming one. A reaper would understand if you killed the girl, it was not a pleasant action but if she was a risk of becoming one or may have already been one, they'd probably kill her by themself anyway.

It would really depend on the reaper group. And for S and Gs i would be willing to bet that some half arsed biker thugs would probably lose that fight.

I have no idea what you're talking about with the S and G's, is that some sort of gang talk?

And all reapers again, value life over others. It says so right in the book that they'd rather kill themself or their loved one than to see them as zombie. Again, a fellow reaper would totally believe another reaper having done "the right thing."

There's no organized miliatry units. Again, the army is MIA.

You are right. The Army as an effective military force is nonexistent. But since there is a class in the book called “Apocalyptic SOLDIER” I am sure that at least 1 former military operative is alive. In fact I would venture a guess that there would be a few small groups of former soldiers/Marines/Airman/Sailors that might have banded together to defend their families or communities. And since old habits/ skills die hard, they would probably use military tactics, equipment, chain of command…… at least on a smaller scale. Not to mention I am sure several former cops and SWAT members would probably do the same. So yes the 10th mountain Div. isn’t going to be marching on Yonkers to push the Zeds back, but a squad or 2 may be running around trying to survive and maybe help out others that they find.

I'm going to quote the book

"While one may think these soldiers left on their own might degenerate into warlords, gang leaders and thugs, most have not. Instead they are highly motivated to maintain order, save lives and kill zombies."

Notice emphasis on the bolded area? Now, tell me how going to gunfight with reapers would help save lives or kill zombies? In fact, I'm pretty sure it'd cost lives and make killing zombies harder.

Or maybe the child has some kind of special ability or knowledge the group would find useful. Perhaps she has some psi powers that allow her to pass by zeds undetected. Perhaps she also knows the location of some nearby supplies or survivors. Just sayin.........

I am going to break your bubble again but kids are not useful like in movies and comics really. If anything, they take tons of time and nurture for them to grow up into strong people. In a time of zombie apocalypse, neither is really all that avaivable. To get a girl, would require a lot of time from some other survivors as well as more mouths to feed. And to prevent her from being totally useless in later years, time must be spent on educating and training her. Again, consuming time and resources.

Ok so kill all the kids. I mean all they do is eat and poop. They have no useful skills at all.

The situation of finding impossible survivor is totally diffent, please don't make comparisions like that.

I also checked (all three of the books released) and there's no psionic powers anywhere in Dead Reign. (Something that genuinely surprised me, but then again it's more down to the earth and realistic) Plus, there's a high chance of finding the supplies on your own. In other words, they do not contribute anything really.

Maybe I am playing in a setting truer to the original incarnation of the game. Check out the Rifter articles. They are actually pretty good.

I don't play Rifter. I play Dead Reign. There's no electro buzzo weapons or such anywhere. You're in the wrong place and arguing using logic that doesn't apply to this game.

That's like me going to the fantasy section and complaining why I can't use my machine gun to mow down the orcs.

Yeah, basically it comes down to shoot the girl, ignore the girl, or restrain the girl if possible to do safely. Personally, I'd err on her being a child zombie as the chances of a little girl surviving on her own alone in a zombie apocalypse without some kind of training or guidance is near zero. The whole humanitarian "don't shoot the girl, she might be an innocent living being just wondering the street looking for mommy" doesn't hold up given the scenario we are dealing with.

Likewise, people with that kind of non-logical humanitarian outlook are the people that didn't survive the zombie apocalypse. Why? Because the zombies ate them when they probably thought the exact same thing about a beaten up loved one or a neighbor. In fact, doesn't it make this a rather clear point in the main book somewhere?

Yes, from page 8 and forward we get the details of the little girls being killed and such. People with non logical humanitarian outlook (I am totally stealing that description since it's awesome) would NOT be survivors, they would have been one of the first people to be infected. The idea that someone playing perfect "boysocut" would survive the entire apocalypse unscratched is just illogical.

You should especially read page 10 if you're thinking about army going around killing zombies and saving little girls as viable options.

Again……..
You are right. The Army as an effective military force is nonexistent. But since there is a class in the book called “Apocalyptic SOLDIER” I am sure that at least 1 former military operative is alive. In fact I would venture a guess that there would be a few small groups of former soldiers/Marines/Airman/Sailors that might have banded together to defend their families or communities. And since old habits/ skills die hard, they would probably use military tactics, equipment, chain of command…… at least on a smaller scale. Not to mention I am sure several former cops and SWAT members would probably do the same. So yes the 10 mountain Div. isn’t going to be marching on Yonkers to push the Zeds back, but a squad or 2 may be running around trying to survive and maybe help out others that they find.

Yes, yes, that's basically what I meant. Honestly, the miliatry is less miliatry than reapers at the moment because the reapers are more banded and have better equipment that they've scavenged, whereareas the best army weaponry and such are the ones that were initially lost and most of them have either become useless or run out of ammo by now.

Trooper Jim I agree with you that children are not useless, though keep in mind Dobergirl is strictly speaking within the context of the immediate zombie survival situation. I don't think she's going to disagree with you that children are good for making sure there's actual people still around in the future who are ideally not death cultists. Also, I understand that her statement "shouldn't be alive" seems overly harsh. It's missing the necessary context to properly frame the statement so it is coming off as being an overall outlook instead of a situational one.

I understand your point. I am just trying to get people to move past the mindless kill it all mentality. once you do that, your RPG experience will improve 10 fold.

I don't kill all. Again, this entire scenario is not possible on any level without it being a trap or zombie or worse. Seriously, no matter how you try to think, there's no getting past it, this entire scenario is built around that the girl should be killed.

Trooper jim, that's the whole problem .. You're not playing Dead Reign in a setting that is actually how DEAD REIGN (the ks Version) is supposed to work.

heck the DR Zombies are super badasses that destroy anything short of super soldiers in minutes.
Not even Superheroes would last in Dead reign because of all the nigh invulnerabilities they have.
Most people I met that have played Dead Reign just use the rifter version of them period.
but you never specified this in your original post.

Neither did the OP. But the KS version is ridiculous. The Zeds are way way to tough, and the weapons have been nerfed to high hell. As written it is almost unplayable. I am not going to enjoy a game where the character i have spent 2 hours making, get whacked 20 min. Into the game. I think it stems from Kevin not knowing the first thing about the genre.

Or, you have no idea how to play it and go around playing rambo or rifter frenzy with your powers you don't have. Of course you get killed! You are doing it wrong!

Sigh.

Ok, my first post about the Chaos marine was a joke, admittedly, but I've kinda kept an eye on this thread none the less.

Up until now, a lot of folks have put forth logical reasons both for and against checking the girl. some have cried, just waste her! Others said keep guns on her and check her out first.

But this post kinda annoyed me. Primarily because it makes absolutely no sense, and is utterly depraved of logic.

First, let me explain to you about Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. Since you seem to be completely and utterly unfamiliar with the term, or its effects.
I was in the Army, I served in a number of combat zones. I can tell you with 100% certainty that children in a war zone act like this. Dazed, vacant eyed, non-responsive. You see when the human mind experiences a great and traumatic event, it blocks it out, but it can also block out any current stimuli. The person is in a Fugue(Thats a autonomous like state of mind with no response to stimulus). Children especially suffer from this when put under prolonged mental stress, or exposed to extreme traumatic events. We most often see this in War Orphans, so named because their parents were killed before their very eyes by some horrific means.
However children's minds also like to simply shut down higher functions as well, resulting in lose of emotional responses. It also leads to what is commonly called a 'Deathwish' in which the child's mind, unable to cope with anymore pain, lose or emotions simply snaps and decides that death is preferable.
I've seen to many children like this in my lifetime. And while a lot of people are saying 'I simply point my gun at them and waste them!' they obviously have never seen a child in such a state. Even for someone like me who had seen death take so many in a multitude of vicious and horrible ways. The little humanity you have left inside shrinks as your eyes meet theirs and you would trade anything, anything you might have or ever will to take that away from a child. I believe any other former or current Service Members who've experienced this will know exactly what I mean and agree. It wouldn't be as simple as you make it out to sound.

Secondly. If you were playing Dead Reign with any sort of logic, then you would know that a squad of Combat trained and hardened Soldiers would be worth a hundred Reapers. Armed with the standard M-16A4, along with a M-249 SAW, and Submachine Guns, grenades and possession of their military training and tactics they would not only be more effective, but they would quickly decimate an area of undead, rendering it a nice habitable safe zone. They would need less people, because they are better armed, trained, supplied and already have experienced combat, thus hesitation when a confirmed threat is confronted is not as likely.

Third. As Written DR is unplayable. It's that simple. Zed's DR is the equivalent of a light armored vehicle, the weapons section was written by someone who had either never handled a gun before, or understood their functions even less. The head shot rules ignore utterly the training of a Combat Sniper. So if your surviving, and your character is acting as you describe, it is you who are not playing it correctly

Fourth. The Reaper Survival Guide, would get you killed if you followed it. It's that simple. I read it and shook my head as it went on, and on about nonsensical ideas, and utter batbrained schemes.

Fifth. If I was in the group, and one of my companions killed an innocent little girl, I'd perform what is referred to as a S&E in the Army. Thats Summary Execution. If my fellow companions disagreed with me, and supported the Murderer, I'd leave the group, but make sure that I brought each to justice for their heinous mindset, because they, not I would be the evil one.

Sixth. You can know what is right or wrong, and be evil, it's called the Aberrant Alignment, you might want to read over those again, as you seem to be playing a miscreant or Diabolic character, Anarchist at best.

[Ravenwing]

I actually did the Little Girl Scenario in a Zombie High school game. the players Rescued her, Cause the Monster with his monster tentacles was coming out from the ceiling and pipes....
And they had gear to Deal with zombies.
Mind you this setting was more HEROMAN meets "DEAD HIGH SCHOOL" but it was dramatic non the less.

Being unable to detect a zombie means you're not gonna mess with an extra body in a survival group.
you'd throw her some ration, move on.

I don't see how personally people can think this, especially of a child.

Now I've argued in other threads about the naivete of trusting everyone you meet, especially on the radio and such. However this situation is a different beast altogether.

Also refusing to take in children or pregnant women(as seems to be the trend on the threads here) is short term survival thinking, which in an Apocalypse set in our modern world is very, very foolish.

Yes both require more resources, but the thing is, those resources are everywhere, easy to get to, and don't add up to as much as many seem to be thinking.

Personally I would think save any that you can, so long as they don't pose a danger to the group, and can be trusted. I know some will point out that children make lots of noise and thus are a danger to the group. To that I say think about it for a moment. A zombie can sense you in a house, whether you make noise or not. Children are fast learners, if they know that making a lot of noise will attract the hordes of flesh eating undead cannibals, they will be quiet. Not infants of course since they have no understanding of the situation, but older children would. However if we toss babies to the hordes to save our own skin, is humanity, and indeed our lives even worth saving? Survival is fine, but at some point you are simply waiting to die, not living as a human should live.

[Talmonis]

I actually did the Little Girl Scenario in a Zombie High school game. the players Rescued her, Cause the Monster with his monster tentacles was coming out from the ceiling and pipes....
And they had gear to Deal with zombies.
Mind you this setting was more HEROMAN meets "DEAD HIGH SCHOOL" but it was dramatic non the less.

Being unable to detect a zombie means you're not gonna mess with an extra body in a survival group.
you'd throw her some ration, move on.

I don't see how personally people can think this, especially of a child.

Now I've argued in other threads about the naivete of trusting everyone you meet, especially on the radio and such. However this situation is a different beast altogether.

Also refusing to take in children or pregnant women(as seems to be the trend on the threads here) is short term survival thinking, which in an Apocalypse set in our modern world is very, very foolish.

Yes both require more resources, but the thing is, those resources are everywhere, easy to get to, and don't add up to as much as many seem to be thinking.

Personally I would think save any that you can, so long as they don't pose a danger to the group, and can be trusted. I know some will point out that children make lots of noise and thus are a danger to the group. To that I say think about it for a moment. A zombie can sense you in a house, whether you make noise or not. Children are fast learners, if they know that making a lot of noise will attract the hordes of flesh eating undead cannibals, they will be quiet. Not infants of course since they have no understanding of the situation, but older children would. However if we toss babies to the hordes to save our own skin, is humanity, and indeed our lives even worth saving? Survival is fine, but at some point you are simply waiting to die, not living as a human should live.

I agree completely. Humanity is only worth saving if we don't become monsters. Save any we can, up to and including saving the last bullets for the children if it comes to it.

[Ravenwing]

I actually did the Little Girl Scenario in a Zombie High school game. the players Rescued her, Cause the Monster with his monster tentacles was coming out from the ceiling and pipes....
And they had gear to Deal with zombies.
Mind you this setting was more HEROMAN meets "DEAD HIGH SCHOOL" but it was dramatic non the less.

Being unable to detect a zombie means you're not gonna mess with an extra body in a survival group.
you'd throw her some ration, move on.

I don't see how personally people can think this, especially of a child.

Now I've argued in other threads about the naivete of trusting everyone you meet, especially on the radio and such. However this situation is a different beast altogether.

Also refusing to take in children or pregnant women(as seems to be the trend on the threads here) is short term survival thinking, which in an Apocalypse set in our modern world is very, very foolish.

Yes both require more resources, but the thing is, those resources are everywhere, easy to get to, and don't add up to as much as many seem to be thinking.

Personally I would think save any that you can, so long as they don't pose a danger to the group, and can be trusted. I know some will point out that children make lots of noise and thus are a danger to the group. To that I say think about it for a moment. A zombie can sense you in a house, whether you make noise or not. Children are fast learners, if they know that making a lot of noise will attract the hordes of flesh eating undead cannibals, they will be quiet. Not infants of course since they have no understanding of the situation, but older children would. However if we toss babies to the hordes to save our own skin, is humanity, and indeed our lives even worth saving? Survival is fine, but at some point you are simply waiting to die, not living as a human should live.

I agree completely. Humanity is only worth saving if we don't become monsters. Save any we can, up to and including saving the last bullets for the children if it comes to it.

Absolutely.

Children are always the future. A world without children, or where children become 'acceptable casualties' is not a human world anymore, and the dead have already won.

If the choice is 'Let the children become Zombies along with everyone else as we're being overran', or kill them, then the choice is clear, kill them so that they do not have to suffer, that is the only humane choice. But it should be your last option.

the question as posted by the OP is not a moral quandary, as their is only one morally sound answer. A good person, or even a somewhat decent one would attempt to rescue the child, and thus check first to see if they were a zombie. Based on the description of her actions, we can logically tell she is not a zombie. She does not moan, her eyes do not follow you with a predatory look. Although caution in a combat zone is the standard operating procedure, and must never be put aside for even a instant. Train guns on her if you must, but your teammates would be better served keeping a look out for ambushers, Zombies, and other threats, while a pair of you approach the child.

[Dobergirl]

So now Dobergirl runs Palladium books and gets to tell people what they can and can't use from the Rifters.

Well, I didn't find any rules about how to bring any of that stuff over or use anything from Rifters so I'd make the players stick to the core Dead Reign rules.

so is the Rifter going to be stopped getting published now just because she says it's wrong to use the Rifters?

Um, no? I just said I like to play Dead Reign, not Rifter. How did you even come to this conclusion?

She gets to say Trooper Jim is doing it wrong but is playing the Reapers completely wrong herself.
Talk about being a hypocrite, Shes' not playing Reapers as they are supposed to be she's just playing Murderous thugs with Reaper abilities.

I'm not a murderous thug. It's clear this girl is not normal and should not be trusted.

So Reapers from how Dobergirl runs Reapers they went from Reapers aka Knights on bikes to murderous Thugs or Death knights when exactly? I don't know of any new books that place the Reapers in the Shoot first and might ask questions later about thier innocence later catagory.

To quote Brad, once again

"Take 'em down fast, baby fast. Us seasoned zombie killers don't break much of a sweat against one zombie, or event two or three, but you have to act fast, and if possible, do it quiet. "

Seeing as the situation shows that she could be either dormant zombie or something worse, the entire idea is to take her down as fast as possible before risking any potential losses.

Where in the fluff in the description comes close to justifying this psychotic episode.

Please explain what is supposedly psychotic about this?

That's the only way to describe it about a class whose alignment and OCC is geared towards saving people and not just executing them for absolutely no reason, or else coming up with a pansy assed comment about it's too risky?

Like I said, majority rules. Majority decide we kill, we do just that.

If dealing with a little girl is too risky then don't play a OCC whose alignment and OCC is geared towards saving them and also stop making them sound all big and bad assed if dealing with little children is too risky.

Dealing with little children is not same as dealing with a zombie or death cultist.

Dealing with fanatics wearing suicide vests and trying to separate them from the innocents is risky and if soldiers could handle dealing with that risk on a daily basis then getting a PID on a little girl who may or may not be a zombie or is a death cult plant is not, especially not for big bad assed Reapers'.

The thing is, she already has somewhat failed the first test by acting like she has no pulse at all. She already acts more zombie than human, which is good enough for me, I don't want to risk my friend being bit just so I can take closer look.

You can't save lives or help people if you are against taking risks.

I agree to an extent, however I also can't save lives or help people if me and my squadmaters get killed or injured.

If you won't take the risks then don't play an OCC that says that's part of what you do.

Killing zombies and hunting them is taking risks. I help salvage stuff and help keep areas secure. I take risks all the time and try to avoid unnecessary risks when they can be avoided.

if everything you post is pretty much against the OCC and their alignment, you are definitely doing it wrong.

I don't think I ever mentioned my aligment but it's scrupulous.

Before you bring out the "Never attack or kill unarmed foe", almost every zombie is unarmed so killing unarmed and attacking them is necessity. "Never harm innocent", in this case I don't intentionally hurt a person. If the person I killed (in this case, little girl) would later revealed as innocent victim, my character was not aware of this. She would also regret and probably feel sad about the whole ordeal.

It really makes those posts an insult to intelligence when you are adamant about others not playing the game correctly.

I do play as tightly to the rules as possible.

This was once a very good roleplay subject, now it's not worth looking at anymore, I even feel quite a few IQ points light after reading one persons posts now not to mention insulted.

Now who's being insulting to intelligence?

So to recap,
Reapers executing kids without a PID is never evil in fact its down right rude of you not to,

Executing is entirely wrong term in this context and discussion.

It's too risky to save lives of others, its a trap.

Well sometimes, obvious trap is obvious.

And Using Palladium books Rifter magazine content in Palladium Books games is wrong.

It's probably okay if you are familiar with Rifts. I am not so I couldn't be able to take them in no matter how much my players would beg. (They haven't)

in an RPG that risk is good roleplay material, you just don't get the same good well done feelings afterwords

Again, you're in a city full of zombies. There's risk, literally in every direction you face.

It doesn't change because the baddies are zombies in a rpg if you are going to play the class that is out to save people then take the risk to save them that's part of what makes that OCC what it is.

Actually, it changes things quite a lot. A single zombie is more than capable of wrecking incredibly devastating effects on a group it catches off guard. Not to mention, they may start moaning and then you see your day ruined.

If you don't want to play with the big dogs taking risks then play it safe with the puppy OCCs just don't insult the OCC by turning them into psychotic killers.

Nice analogy hon. ~

I agree with almost everything Gamer said.

Indeed, alignment and that particular OCC REQUIRES that they check first. I mean really it only takes several more moments to get a PID anyway.

You both seem to not realize that the OP did mention that we already have established and seen the person and they have clearly seen me. They just stare blankly and do not react in any way. That is just not normal.

First, let me explain to you about Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. Since you seem to be completely and utterly unfamiliar with the term, or its effects.
I was in the Army, I served in a number of combat zones. I can tell you with 100% certainty that children in a war zone act like this. Dazed, vacant eyed, non-responsive. You see when the human mind experiences a great and traumatic event, it blocks it out, but it can also block out any current stimuli. The person is in a Fugue(Thats a autonomous like state of mind with no response to stimulus). Children especially suffer from this when put under prolonged mental stress, or exposed to extreme traumatic events. We most often see this in War Orphans, so named because their parents were killed before their very eyes by some horrific means.
However children's minds also like to simply shut down higher functions as well, resulting in lose of emotional responses. It also leads to what is commonly called a 'Deathwish' in which the child's mind, unable to cope with anymore pain, lose or emotions simply snaps and decides that death is preferable.
I've seen to many children like this in my lifetime. And while a lot of people are saying 'I simply point my gun at them and waste them!' they obviously have never seen a child in such a state. Even for someone like me who had seen death take so many in a multitude of vicious and horrible ways. The little humanity you have left inside shrinks as your eyes meet theirs and you would trade anything, anything you might have or ever will to take that away from a child. I believe any other former or current Service Members who've experienced this will know exactly what I mean and agree. It wouldn't be as simple as you make it out to sound.

I totally understand what you're saying but honestly, I find it quite hard to believe that a kid, who'd see actual human contact after a traumatic experience of zombie attack would have absolute no reaction when they're seen they're not in fact alone. It'd most likely cause a shock to them first, then make them become emotional again.

This however, is an area that is entirely impossible to debate.

Secondly. If you were playing Dead Reign with any sort of logic, then you would know that a squad of Combat trained and hardened Soldiers would be worth a hundred Reapers. Armed with the standard M-16A4, along with a M-249 SAW, and Submachine Guns, grenades and possession of their military training and tactics they would not only be more effective, but they would quickly decimate an area of undead, rendering it a nice habitable safe zone. They would need less people, because they are better armed, trained, supplied and already have experienced combat, thus hesitation when a confirmed threat is confronted is not as likely.

This is not true. Soldiers are sparse.

I just checked and you also have access to only one ancient weapon of choice, a survival knife and one rifle. No grenades or any of that other heavy weaponry, like I said before most of army is gone and what is remaining of it, is just barebones. The only way to obtain heavy stuff like that would be from miliatry base of sorts but I'd imagine it totally piled with zombies and it just not being worth it to get just one gun.

Third. As Written DR is unplayable. It's that simple. Zed's DR is the equivalent of a light armored vehicle, the weapons section was written by someone who had either never handled a gun before, or understood their functions even less. The head shot rules ignore utterly the training of a Combat Sniper. So if your surviving, and your character is acting as you describe, it is you who are not playing it correctly

Reapers have bonuses against zombies actually. And they specialize in hit and run tactics, instead of head on combat. Survival is not always about making a kill, it's also about being able to evade and find routes to escape when things go sour.

Fourth. The Reaper Survival Guide, would get you killed if you followed it. It's that simple. I read it and shook my head as it went on, and on about nonsensical ideas, and utter batbrained schemes.

Zombie101?

What's wrong with that?

Fifth. If I was in the group, and one of my companions killed an innocent little girl, I'd perform what is referred to as a S&E in the Army. Thats Summary Execution. If my fellow companions disagreed with me, and supported the Murderer, I'd leave the group, but make sure that I brought each to justice for their heinous mindset, because they, not I would be the evil one.

You have no authority to do any executions (Reapers are equal) and if you'd try and do that, I'd probably respond by shooting back or if you'd kill me, my friend would slit your throat for your trouble. It's soon guns blazing everywhere again.


Ironically also, you would be the murderer, meanwhile I'd be manslaughter at worst, zombie slayer at best.


Also, since majority already DID decide we kill her, you practically just shot the messenger and now the entire group is going to pull guns on you.

Sixth. You can know what is right or wrong, and be evil, it's called the Aberrant Alignment, you might want to read over those again, as you seem to be playing a miscreant or Diabolic
character, Anarchist at best.

Of course you can know what's right or wrong. And I agree it at least makes more sense than good person killing their comrades just because.



Also, the dead have already won and we're just struggling to survive.

[Ravenwing]

I'm just going to go over a few things you seem to not be taking into account.

Standard US Army Infantryman Issue, Circa 1995 when I enlisted was as follows.
11/A: M-16A2/ 7 Mags, Field Radio, First Aid Kit, 2 Doses of Atropine(Sp?), 2 Smoke Grenades, 4 Fragmentation Grenades, 3 Signal Flares(Green) 2 Signal Flares(Red). 1 Bayonet(Your survival knife if you want to think of it that way) Optional: Underslung Colt M203 Grenade Launcher/ 15 Rounds of 40MM grenades. Or a Remington 870(Modified underslung) shotgun/ 30 rounds(Divide 15 00Buck/Slug)

11/B As above, minus radio, 6 Frag Grenades, 4 Smoke Grenades, 6 Flares(green) 3 Flares(Red), 3 Flares(white)

11/C M249 SAW(Squad Automatic Weapon) with 10 30 Rd Mags, rest same as 11/B

11/D M-21 Sniper rifle/Scope 7 30Rd Mags. rest as above.

As a Solider you would begin with better equipment since you were already in possession of it. The fact that the DR book is utterly ignorant of Military advantages is one of the things that makes it unplayable.

2nd:
If a unit of soldiers, or ex soldiers(Which as one I would be in) each and everyone of them understands the UCMJ(or parts of it at least). By being in the group they pretty much agree to be bound by it. Summary Execution is a part of the UCMJ, it is the duty of the officer in charge to perform and maintain Discipline in the Field. In events were the CO is unable, or unwilling to do so, it falls on the next in command, who is likewise bound by them, and so on. Killing a unarmed girl is murder, a violation of the UCMJ, and the Geneva Conventions which soldiers are suppose to be honorbound by. The UCMJ provides a penalty for this crime(Murder of civilians), would you like to know what it is? Death. Under the Articles of the UCMJ as a member of the squad I am bound to obey if one of my teamates executes a little girl, it is my responsibility to arrest and detain him if in a non-combat situation. In combat it is completely acceptable for me to perform a Summary Execution. Once back to base there's a form I have to fill out, along with the others of my squad. The UCMJ also calls for the execution of the Commanding officer for Dereliction of Duty in wartime if he isn't the one to pull the trigger, or order the execution, or detainment of the Criminal.

3rd I'd never be with the reapers. I find them unrealistic. They are, according to the fluff a motorcycle gang. For some reason, I just can't see the Hell's Angels doing stuff like the Reapers do in the DR book, it makes no sense. Period. Furthermore, the Reapers Guide completely disregards logic, tactical knowledge, and other aspects that make it unbelievable. I understand what KS was going for, an in world character voice to tell the story of the world to readers. However it wasn't really needed. It's zombies, we get it, we already know about them, we all play Resident Evil, watch Dawn of the Dead, etc.

4th: The game is unplayable as written due to a number of reasons, none of them are overcome due to the bonuses a Reaper gets for their OCC. The Zed's natural AR means they are as armored as a Armored Vehicle.
To put that into prospective drive by the nation guard armory. See those tank like things they have parked out back? Yeah a Zed is more armored then that.
Doesn't make any sense does it?
Zed's aren't suppose to be hard to kill, that's not what the problem fighting them is. No it's numbers that are the problem. there are many times over there numbers to your own. DR completely got this wrong. And yes I realize that the Zombie's AR is not actual armor, but a measurement of how they are generally immune to damage that does not effect their skulls. Regardless, because you can blast a Zombie in the mainbody, reduce it to zero and the Zed is out of commission, effectively nullifies the logic behind the zombies AR. If it was only damage to the skull/brain that mattered then that would be different. But even then an AR would not be needed, as any attack not aimed for the head would be pointless.

5th: The Rifter isn't for Rifts. It's a quarterly magazine(sourcebook) that Palladium puts out, that includes material(Admittedly option, but often official material as well) for all of it's game lines. Rifter# 40 & 45 are in fact where DR originally appeared(and at an open house before even that under a different name). Many players(myself included) prefer that version of the game to what was published, and we incorporate it into the game, because as written DR is unplayable.

6th: If the group I was with decided to kill her, and assuming I wasn't A) with a squad of fellow Soldiers, B)able to reason with them, I would simply leave. A good solider understand a battle he can not win, and makes a tactical withdrawal. Once I was away from the group, and on better tactical terms, I'd warn others of my former group, and enlist a posse to capture and punish them for murder.

[Ravenwing]

I actually did the Little Girl Scenario in a Zombie High school game. the players Rescued her, Cause the Monster with his monster tentacles was coming out from the ceiling and pipes....
And they had gear to Deal with zombies.
Mind you this setting was more HEROMAN meets "DEAD HIGH SCHOOL" but it was dramatic non the less.

Being unable to detect a zombie means you're not gonna mess with an extra body in a survival group.
you'd throw her some ration, move on.

I don't see how personally people can think this, especially of a child.

Now I've argued in other threads about the naivete of trusting everyone you meet, especially on the radio and such. However this situation is a different beast altogether.

Also refusing to take in children or pregnant women(as seems to be the trend on the threads here) is short term survival thinking, which in an Apocalypse set in our modern world is very, very foolish.

Yes both require more resources, but the thing is, those resources are everywhere, easy to get to, and don't add up to as much as many seem to be thinking.

Personally I would think save any that you can, so long as they don't pose a danger to the group, and can be trusted. I know some will point out that children make lots of noise and thus are a danger to the group. To that I say think about it for a moment. A zombie can sense you in a house, whether you make noise or not. Children are fast learners, if they know that making a lot of noise will attract the hordes of flesh eating undead cannibals, they will be quiet. Not infants of course since they have no understanding of the situation, but older children would. However if we toss babies to the hordes to save our own skin, is humanity, and indeed our lives even worth saving? Survival is fine, but at some point you are simply waiting to die, not living as a human should live.

Dig up your history links on the Middle Kingdom of egypt. Some Calamity caused massive deforestation and starvation all over the known world. People were EATING THEIR BABIES - only the strong would survive. any kid who got sick, any adult that got sick, became food. Water rations only went to the healthy. You are only thinking this way because we're surrounded by everything and have morals from the viewpoint where resources are not scarce. and quite frankly, The girl would probably be taken, and sold to a religious community since survivors are not too hellbent on recreating society then escaping the next raid.


Now which is worse, Killing the girl, Saving her only to sell her later on, or losing half your team to a zombie trap?...

Unfortunately you example of Ancient Egypt doesn't apply to this debate. Here's why.

In the event of a zombie Apocalypse, food will be in abundance, as will things like ammunition, medical supplies, etc. Modern manufacturing has ensured that their are more goods then people on this planet even with it filled to the brim. In a Zed Apocalypse, there are less people, therefore less demand for goods.

Can Goods for example have an indefinite shelf life. they may not taste very good past the date, but it isn't an expiration date, not by a long shot. Dried White rice likewise has indefinite shelf life. Flour, sugar, dry goods? The same, if sealed, they'll be safe to eat for at least a hundred years, if not longer.

So my viewpoint that resources are indefinite is the correct one in this situation. If all else fails, I can hunt. Stopping at a book store produces books on edible plants for those that don't already have this knowledge. I can scavenge for anything I need. Less people, means less demand on the environment, and more resources for me and whomever I'm with.

But my thought process and viewpoint is a reflection of the times. I am a person from the Modern Era, complete with Morals and ethics created from that time. I suspect some might throw away those ethics easily enough, but not I. While I will defend myself, and my family, not to mention I'd be the least trusting person on the planet, I'm not going to become a slaver, murderer, or rapist. A bandit? Perhaps, but a bandits goal is to take what you have, not your life. And why expose myself and my family to the risk of infection, theft, rape or murder when I can just as easily fortify my residence, make raids into the surrounding area, and hold out indefinitely? We might all be eating Macaroni and cheese, and ramen noodles three times a day, but we're eating, and whats more, we haven't become a monster.

[Mech-Viper Prime]

I find moral value very interesting in these end of world type things, how far would you be willing to go to survive, it' about making that fast hard call no one likes.

[Trooper Jim]

Before getting to Trooper Jim, I'd like to go back to Horizon911 who's post I finally had time to figure out.

Hey Dobergirl.....How ya doing? So I will let Horizon911 defend himself, I am just going to address your points that were directed at me, OK thanks.

OK i am quickly growing weary of the whole "kill the pregnant woman or child" mentality of some of your guys characters.

A pregnant woman is two lives, herself and the baby. A child is one. That is not same thing at all and I am not sure if zombies can get pregnant. (In some movies they can, but maybe someone more well versed can answer if the zombies in Dead Reign can reproduce?)

No, Zeds don’t reproduce in the traditional manner, they reproduce by killing you. But any ways this was a direct comment on a previous post, where some folks were talking about killing off a PC, that was a pregnant stripper. They sited a myriad of reasons, most equally asinine.

Again, a pregnant woman is two lives, it is not equal comparision and seeing as zombies can't get pregnant you say, it's clear that the person would be a human from the belly alone.


That wouldn't put her in clear yet though, could just as well be any of the human baddies.

OK lets just forget the stupid pregnant lady thing. That comment was in direct response to a completely different thread. So just forget I said anything.

I kind of thought the whole point of the game is humanity surviving the zombie apocalypse and rebuilding. How can we survive as a species if you kill the future generations?

I am not on some sort of spree killing children. It's just one child who shouldn't even be alive honestly speaking. Killing her would not be "killing future genearions". By teh way, my character has children too. Many of the group I hang out with are mothers and fathers who are doing what they do exactly for the future generations.

So who decides if someone “ shouldn’t even be alive”. What if my character has spent weeks and months surviving his way through Zed infested territory. But as soon as he is spotted by a group of survivors, he is gunned down……”Well he was deep in zombie country and he shouldn’t have survived…so we shot him”. Right on that is sound logic.

Majority decides. If majority say we shoot, we shoot. If minority say we shoot, we investigate. But I'm going to be honest, in almost all the situations shooting is almost always the majority.

Since you are hell bent on interjecting your brand of reality into this game, I am going to do the same. Majority rule doesn't work in a combat situation. You have to have a clearly defined chain of command. While you and your Reaper buddies are taking a secret ballot to determine your next course of action, you will get flanked and terminated with extreme prejudice.

My character would probably of killed anyone that tried to kill the child without investigating it first. But he has a strong personal belief in what is right and what and what is wrong.

Your character is a hypocrite and should be played as evil. For saying he has strong belief of what is right and wrong, you think it's okay to MURDER your friend just because of a mistake like that? Like people pointed out, that would probably start a gunfight and soon everyone was dead. That's not really a thing good aligned character would do. Even if for some reason this wouldn't cause rebute from you killing a fellow person, I'd make you become evil in aligment for balant murder and your reputation would be tarnished for ages to come.

But even if for some reason no one bats an eye of balant murder and such, you've just wasted a person who can actually do something and you have now two bodies. I'd like to see you explain this to the family of the person you killed with your good guy

"Well, Billy killed a girl who may have been a zombie. I didn't like that, so I killed him. Then again, I have strong belief in what is right and wrong."

Actually he is an evil alignment. But did you read what I said? WITH OUT INVESTIGATING!!!!!!!! If she is determined to be a zombie, yes kill it. But if she is a survivor, then no, don’t kill her. The Players should be resourceful enough to come up with a way to conduct the investigation while minimizing risk to themselves. That is sort part of the point of Role-Playing games, isn’t it?
You are right about that Billy’s killing causing strife in the group. But if Billy is a homicidal maniac that kills everyone he sees, before he figures out if they are alive or not. He probably won’t be missed much.

So wait, he's an evil aligment character who has strong belif in what is right and wrong? How the hell does that even work?

Here you go.

Aberrant (Evil)
The cliche that there is "No honor among thieves ." is false when dealing with the aberrant character. This is a person who is driven to attain his goals through force, power, and intimidation. Yet the aberrant person stands apart from the norm, with his own, personal code of ethics (although twisted ethics by the standards of good). He expects loyalty from his minions, punishing disloyalty and treachery with a swift, merciful death. An aberrant person will always keep his word of honor and uphold
any bargains. He will define his terms and live by them, whether anyone else likes it or not.
Aberrant Characters Will ...
1.Always keep his word of honor (he is honorable) .
2.Lie to and cheat those not worthy of his respect.
3.Mayor may not kill an unarmed foe.
4.Not kill (may harm, kidnap) an innocent, particularly a child.
5.Never kills for pleasure.
6.Not resort to inhumane treatment of prisoners, but torture, although distasteful, is a necessary means of extracting information.
7.Never torture for pleasure.
8.Mayor may not help someone in need.
9.Work with others to attain his goals.
10.Respect honor and self-discipline.
11.Never betray a friend.

And as a GM, there would be consequences for the "shoot first" mentality. Oh wait that child you cleaved in two with your chainsaw.........yea she turned out to be the missing child of another reaper gang or surviving military unit. And guess what, her father and his group were looking for the child and rounded the corner in time to watch you MURDER her, oops. Yea that might lead to a tense moment or two.

Reapers value life over everything but despise zombies enough to choose death always over becoming one. A reaper would understand if you killed the girl, it was not a pleasant action but if she was a risk of becoming one or may have already been one, they'd probably kill her by themself anyway.

It would really depend on the reaper group. And for S and Gs i would be willing to bet that some half arsed biker thugs would probably lose that fight.

I have no idea what you're talking about with the S and G's, is that some sort of gang talk?

And all reapers again, value life over others. It says so right in the book that they'd rather kill themself or their loved one than to see them as zombie. Again, a fellow reaper would totally believe another reaper having done "the right thing."

Lol, no it isn't a gang thing. I was trying to find a P.C. Way of saying Sheets and grins.....sheets meaning another way of saying poopie.........

There's no organized miliatry units. Again, the army is MIA.

You are right. The Army as an effective military force is nonexistent. But since there is a class in the book called “Apocalyptic SOLDIER” I am sure that at least 1 former military operative is alive. In fact I would venture a guess that there would be a few small groups of former soldiers/Marines/Airman/Sailors that might have banded together to defend their families or communities. And since old habits/ skills die hard, they would probably use military tactics, equipment, chain of command…… at least on a smaller scale. Not to mention I am sure several former cops and SWAT members would probably do the same. So yes the 10th mountain Div. isn’t going to be marching on Yonkers to push the Zeds back, but a squad or 2 may be running around trying to survive and maybe help out others that they find.

I'm going to quote the book

"While one may think these soldiers left on their own might degenerate into warlords, gang leaders and thugs, most have not. Instead they are highly motivated to maintain order, save lives and kill zombies."

Notice emphasis on the bolded area? Now, tell me how going to gunfight with reapers would help save lives or kill zombies? In fact, I'm pretty sure it'd cost lives and make killing zombies harder.

Kevin has a twisted view of the military and I personally don't prescribe to his skewed version of how members of the military would operate in this setting.

Or maybe the child has some kind of special ability or knowledge the group would find useful. Perhaps she has some psi powers that allow her to pass by zeds undetected. Perhaps she also knows the location of some nearby supplies or survivors. Just sayin.........

I am going to break your bubble again but kids are not useful like in movies and comics really. If anything, they take tons of time and nurture for them to grow up into strong people. In a time of zombie apocalypse, neither is really all that avaivable. To get a girl, would require a lot of time from some other survivors as well as more mouths to feed. And to prevent her from being totally useless in later years, time must be spent on educating and training her. Again, consuming time and resources.

Ok so kill all the kids. I mean all they do is eat and poop. They have no useful skills at all.

The situation of finding impossible survivor is totally diffent, please don't make comparisions like that.

I am not sure what you are trying to say?

I also checked (all three of the books released) and there's no psionic powers anywhere in Dead Reign. (Something that genuinely surprised me, but then again it's more down to the earth and realistic) Plus, there's a high chance of finding the supplies on your own. In other words, they do not contribute anything really.

Maybe I am playing in a setting truer to the original incarnation of the game. Check out the Rifter articles. They are actually pretty good.

I don't play Rifter. I play Dead Reign. There's no electro buzzo weapons or such anywhere. You're in the wrong place and arguing using logic that doesn't apply to this game.

That's like me going to the fantasy section and complaining why I can't use my machine gun to mow down the orcs.

Rifter isn't a game..... It is a magazine published by Palladium books. It is full of useful source material for the majority of their games.

Yeah, basically it comes down to shoot the girl, ignore the girl, or restrain the girl if possible to do safely. Personally, I'd err on her being a child zombie as the chances of a little girl surviving on her own alone in a zombie apocalypse without some kind of training or guidance is near zero. The whole humanitarian "don't shoot the girl, she might be an innocent living being just wondering the street looking for mommy" doesn't hold up given the scenario we are dealing with.

Likewise, people with that kind of non-logical humanitarian outlook are the people that didn't survive the zombie apocalypse. Why? Because the zombies ate them when they probably thought the exact same thing about a beaten up loved one or a neighbor. In fact, doesn't it make this a rather clear point in the main book somewhere?

Yes, from page 8 and forward we get the details of the little girls being killed and such. People with non logical humanitarian outlook (I am totally stealing that description since it's awesome) would NOT be survivors, they would have been one of the first people to be infected. The idea that someone playing perfect "boysocut" would survive the entire apocalypse unscratched is just illogical.

You should especially read page 10 if you're thinking about army going around killing zombies and saving little girls as viable options.

Again……..
You are right. The Army as an effective military force is nonexistent. But since there is a class in the book called “Apocalyptic SOLDIER” I am sure that at least 1 former military operative is alive. In fact I would venture a guess that there would be a few small groups of former soldiers/Marines/Airman/Sailors that might have banded together to defend their families or communities. And since old habits/ skills die hard, they would probably use military tactics, equipment, chain of command…… at least on a smaller scale. Not to mention I am sure several former cops and SWAT members would probably do the same. So yes the 10 mountain Div. isn’t going to be marching on Yonkers to push the Zeds back, but a squad or 2 may be running around trying to survive and maybe help out others that they find.

Yes, yes, that's basically what I meant. Honestly, the miliatry is less miliatry than reapers at the moment because the reapers are more banded and have better equipment that they've scavenged, whereareas the best army weaponry and such are the ones that were initially lost and most of them have either become useless or run out of ammo by now.

So why would the military survivors run out of ammo before your precious Reapers? You realize that using the setting as described by Kevin, their would be plenty of ammo, weapons and food for the taking.

Trooper Jim I agree with you that children are not useless, though keep in mind Dobergirl is strictly speaking within the context of the immediate zombie survival situation. I don't think she's going to disagree with you that children are good for making sure there's actual people still around in the future who are ideally not death cultists. Also, I understand that her statement "shouldn't be alive" seems overly harsh. It's missing the necessary context to properly frame the statement so it is coming off as being an overall outlook instead of a situational one.

I understand your point. I am just trying to get people to move past the mindless kill it all mentality. once you do that, your RPG experience will improve 10 fold.

I don't kill all. Again, this entire scenario is not possible on any level without it being a trap or zombie or worse. Seriously, no matter how you try to think, there's no getting past it, this entire scenario is built around that the girl should be killed.

Your opinion, not mine,

Trooper jim, that's the whole problem .. You're not playing Dead Reign in a setting that is actually how DEAD REIGN (the ks Version) is supposed to work.

heck the DR Zombies are super badasses that destroy anything short of super soldiers in minutes.
Not even Superheroes would last in Dead reign because of all the nigh invulnerabilities they have.
Most people I met that have played Dead Reign just use the rifter version of them period.
but you never specified this in your original post.

Neither did the OP. But the KS version is ridiculous. The Zeds are way way to tough, and the weapons have been nerfed to high hell. As written it is almost unplayable. I am not going to enjoy a game where the character i have spent 2 hours making, get whacked 20 min. Into the game. I think it stems from Kevin not knowing the first thing about the genre.

Or, you have no idea how to play it and go around playing rambo or rifter frenzy with your powers you don't have. Of course you get killed! You are doing it wrong!

Once again you are not clear.

[Trooper Jim]

I'm just going to go over a few things you seem to not be taking into account.

Standard US Army Infantryman Issue, Circa 1995 when I enlisted was as follows.
11/A: M-16A2/ 7 Mags, Field Radio, First Aid Kit, 2 Doses of Atropine(Sp?), 2 Smoke Grenades, 4 Fragmentation Grenades, 3 Signal Flares(Green) 2 Signal Flares(Red). 1 Bayonet(Your survival knife if you want to think of it that way) Optional: Underslung Colt M203 Grenade Launcher/ 15 Rounds of 40MM grenades. Or a Remington 870(Modified underslung) shotgun/ 30 rounds(Divide 15 00Buck/Slug)

11/B As above, minus radio, 6 Frag Grenades, 4 Smoke Grenades, 6 Flares(green) 3 Flares(Red), 3 Flares(white)

11/C M249 SAW(Squad Automatic Weapon) with 10 30 Rd Mags, rest same as 11/B

11/D M-21 Sniper rifle/Scope 7 30Rd Mags. rest as above.

As a Solider you would begin with better equipment since you were already in possession of it. The fact that the DR book is utterly ignorant of Military advantages is one of the things that makes it unplayable.

Thank you for the breakdown, very help full.

2nd:
If a unit of soldiers, or ex soldiers(Which as one I would be in) each and everyone of them understands the UCMJ(or parts of it at least). By being in the group they pretty much agree to be bound by it. Summary Execution is a part of the UCMJ, it is the duty of the officer in charge to perform and maintain Discipline in the Field. In events were the CO is unable, or unwilling to do so, it falls on the next in command, who is likewise bound by them, and so on. Killing a unarmed girl is murder, a violation of the UCMJ, and the Geneva Conventions which soldiers are suppose to be honorbound by. The UCMJ provides a penalty for this crime(Murder of civilians), would you like to know what it is? Death. Under the Articles of the UCMJ as a member of the squad I am bound to obey if one of my teamates executes a little girl, it is my responsibility to arrest and detain him if in a non-combat situation. In combat it is completely acceptable for me to perform a Summary Execution. Once back to base there's a form I have to fill out, along with the others of my squad. The UCMJ also calls for the execution of the Commanding officer for Dereliction of Duty in wartime if he isn't the one to pull the trigger, or order the execution, or detainment of the Criminal.

This is the point I was trying to make.

3rd I'd never be with the reapers. I find them unrealistic. They are, according to the fluff a motorcycle gang. For some reason, I just can't see the Hell's Angels doing stuff like the Reapers do in the DR book, it makes no sense. Period. Furthermore, the Reapers Guide completely disregards logic, tactical knowledge, and other aspects that make it unbelievable. I understand what KS was going for, an in world character voice to tell the story of the world to readers. However it wasn't really needed. It's zombies, we get it, we already know about them, we all play Resident Evil, watch Dawn of the Dead, etc.

I don't think Keven has an understanding of Outlaw Biker culture either. Hell's Angels, Chingalings or any other 1%er clubs are not who you want to run into during the apocalypse. Unless you find the prospect of being robbed, raped, sodomized and murdered a fun one, you might want to avoid these born losers at all cost.

4th: The game is unplayable as written due to a number of reasons, none of them are overcome due to the bonuses a Reaper gets for their OCC. The Zed's natural AR means they are as armored as a Armored Vehicle.
To put that into prospective drive by the nation guard armory. See those tank like things they have parked out back? Yeah a Zed is more armored then that.
Doesn't make any sense does it?
Zed's aren't suppose to be hard to kill, that's not what the problem fighting them is. No it's numbers that are the problem. there are many times over there numbers to your own. DR completely got this wrong. And yes I realize that the Zombie's AR is not actual armor, but a measurement of how they are generally immune to damage that does not effect their skulls. Regardless, because you can blast a Zombie in the mainbody, reduce it to zero and the Zed is out of commission, effectively nullifies the logic behind the zombies AR. If it was only damage to the skull/brain that mattered then that would be different. But even then an AR would not be needed, as any attack not aimed for the head would be pointless.

5th: The Rifter isn't for Rifts. It's a quarterly magazine(sourcebook) that Palladium puts out, that includes material(Admittedly option, but often official material as well) for all of it's game lines. Rifter# 40 & 45 are in fact where DR originally appeared(and at an open house before even that under a different name). Many players(myself included) prefer that version of the game to what was published, and we incorporate it into the game, because as written DR is unplayable.

6th: If the group I was with decided to kill her, and assuming I wasn't A) with a squad of fellow Soldiers, B)able to reason with them, I would simply leave. A good solider understand a battle he can not win, and makes a tactical withdrawal. Once I was away from the group, and on better tactical terms, I'd warn others of my former group, and enlist a posse to capture and punish them for murder.

What he said.

[Trooper Jim]

Before getting to Trooper Jim, I'd like to go back to Horizon911 who's post I finally had time to figure out.

Hey Dobergirl.....How ya doing? So I will let Horizon911 defend himself, I am just going to address your points that were directed at me, OK thanks.

OK i am quickly growing weary of the whole "kill the pregnant woman or child" mentality of some of your guys characters.

A pregnant woman is two lives, herself and the baby. A child is one. That is not same thing at all and I am not sure if zombies can get pregnant. (In some movies they can, but maybe someone more well versed can answer if the zombies in Dead Reign can reproduce?)

No, Zeds don’t reproduce in the traditional manner, they reproduce by killing you. But any ways this was a direct comment on a previous post, where some folks were talking about killing off a PC, that was a pregnant stripper. They sited a myriad of reasons, most equally asinine.

Again, a pregnant woman is two lives, it is not equal comparision and seeing as zombies can't get pregnant you say, it's clear that the person would be a human from the belly alone.


That wouldn't put her in clear yet though, could just as well be any of the human baddies.

OK lets just forget the stupid pregnant lady thing. That comment was in direct response to a completely different thread. So just forget I said anything.

I kind of thought the whole point of the game is humanity surviving the zombie apocalypse and rebuilding. How can we survive as a species if you kill the future generations?

I am not on some sort of spree killing children. It's just one child who shouldn't even be alive honestly speaking. Killing her would not be "killing future genearions". By teh way, my character has children too. Many of the group I hang out with are mothers and fathers who are doing what they do exactly for the future generations.

So who decides if someone “ shouldn’t even be alive”. What if my character has spent weeks and months surviving his way through Zed infested territory. But as soon as he is spotted by a group of survivors, he is gunned down……”Well he was deep in zombie country and he shouldn’t have survived…so we shot him”. Right on that is sound logic.

Majority decides. If majority say we shoot, we shoot. If minority say we shoot, we investigate. But I'm going to be honest, in almost all the situations shooting is almost always the majority.

Since you are hell bent on interjecting your brand of reality into this game, I am going to do the same. Majority rule doesn't work in a combat situation. You have to have a clearly defined chain of command. While you and your Reaper buddies are taking a secret ballot to determine your next course of action, you will get flanked and terminated with extreme prejudice.

My character would probably of killed anyone that tried to kill the child without investigating it first. But he has a strong personal belief in what is right and what and what is wrong.

Your character is a hypocrite and should be played as evil. For saying he has strong belief of what is right and wrong, you think it's okay to MURDER your friend just because of a mistake like that? Like people pointed out, that would probably start a gunfight and soon everyone was dead. That's not really a thing good aligned character would do. Even if for some reason this wouldn't cause rebute from you killing a fellow person, I'd make you become evil in aligment for balant murder and your reputation would be tarnished for ages to come.

But even if for some reason no one bats an eye of balant murder and such, you've just wasted a person who can actually do something and you have now two bodies. I'd like to see you explain this to the family of the person you killed with your good guy

"Well, Billy killed a girl who may have been a zombie. I didn't like that, so I killed him. Then again, I have strong belief in what is right and wrong."

Actually he is an evil alignment. But did you read what I said? WITH OUT INVESTIGATING!!!!!!!! If she is determined to be a zombie, yes kill it. But if she is a survivor, then no, don’t kill her. The Players should be resourceful enough to come up with a way to conduct the investigation while minimizing risk to themselves. That is sort part of the point of Role-Playing games, isn’t it?
You are right about that Billy’s killing causing strife in the group. But if Billy is a homicidal maniac that kills everyone he sees, before he figures out if they are alive or not. He probably won’t be missed much.

So wait, he's an evil aligment character who has strong belif in what is right and wrong? How the hell does that even work?

Here you go.

Aberrant (Evil)
The cliche that there is "No honor among thieves ." is false when dealing with the aberrant character. This is a person who is driven to attain his goals through force, power, and intimidation. Yet the aberrant person stands apart from the norm, with his own, personal code of ethics (although twisted ethics by the standards of good). He expects loyalty from his minions, punishing disloyalty and treachery with a swift, merciful death. An aberrant person will always keep his word of honor and uphold
any bargains. He will define his terms and live by them, whether anyone else likes it or not.
Aberrant Characters Will ...
1.Always keep his word of honor (he is honorable) .
2.Lie to and cheat those not worthy of his respect.
3.Mayor may not kill an unarmed foe.
4.Not kill (may harm, kidnap) an innocent, particularly a child.
5.Never kills for pleasure.
6.Not resort to inhumane treatment of prisoners, but torture, although distasteful, is a necessary means of extracting information.
7.Never torture for pleasure.
8.Mayor may not help someone in need.
9.Work with others to attain his goals.
10.Respect honor and self-discipline.
11.Never betray a friend.

And as a GM, there would be consequences for the "shoot first" mentality. Oh wait that child you cleaved in two with your chainsaw.........yea she turned out to be the missing child of another reaper gang or surviving military unit. And guess what, her father and his group were looking for the child and rounded the corner in time to watch you MURDER her, oops. Yea that might lead to a tense moment or two.

Reapers value life over everything but despise zombies enough to choose death always over becoming one. A reaper would understand if you killed the girl, it was not a pleasant action but if she was a risk of becoming one or may have already been one, they'd probably kill her by themself anyway.

It would really depend on the reaper group. And for S and Gs i would be willing to bet that some half arsed biker thugs would probably lose that fight.

I have no idea what you're talking about with the S and G's, is that some sort of gang talk?

And all reapers again, value life over others. It says so right in the book that they'd rather kill themself or their loved one than to see them as zombie. Again, a fellow reaper would totally believe another reaper having done "the right thing."

Lol, no it isn't a gang thing. I was trying to find a P.C. Way of saying Sheets and grins.....sheets meaning another way of saying poopie.........

There's no organized miliatry units. Again, the army is MIA.

You are right. The Army as an effective military force is nonexistent. But since there is a class in the book called “Apocalyptic SOLDIER” I am sure that at least 1 former military operative is alive. In fact I would venture a guess that there would be a few small groups of former soldiers/Marines/Airman/Sailors that might have banded together to defend their families or communities. And since old habits/ skills die hard, they would probably use military tactics, equipment, chain of command…… at least on a smaller scale. Not to mention I am sure several former cops and SWAT members would probably do the same. So yes the 10th mountain Div. isn’t going to be marching on Yonkers to push the Zeds back, but a squad or 2 may be running around trying to survive and maybe help out others that they find.

I'm going to quote the book

"While one may think these soldiers left on their own might degenerate into warlords, gang leaders and thugs, most have not. Instead they are highly motivated to maintain order, save lives and kill zombies."

Notice emphasis on the bolded area? Now, tell me how going to gunfight with reapers would help save lives or kill zombies? In fact, I'm pretty sure it'd cost lives and make killing zombies harder.

Kevin has a twisted view of the military and I personally don't prescribe to his skewed version of how members of the military would operate in this setting. OK so I am going to say this......The reapers are one of the dumbest ideas in the game, They are just glorified outlaw bikers. What makes them anymore effective at killing zombies than anyone else?

Or maybe the child has some kind of special ability or knowledge the group would find useful. Perhaps she has some psi powers that allow her to pass by zeds undetected. Perhaps she also knows the location of some nearby supplies or survivors. Just sayin.........

I am going to break your bubble again but kids are not useful like in movies and comics really. If anything, they take tons of time and nurture for them to grow up into strong people. In a time of zombie apocalypse, neither is really all that avaivable. To get a girl, would require a lot of time from some other survivors as well as more mouths to feed. And to prevent her from being totally useless in later years, time must be spent on educating and training her. Again, consuming time and resources.

Ok so kill all the kids. I mean all they do is eat and poop. They have no useful skills at all.

The situation of finding impossible survivor is totally diffent, please don't make comparisions like that.

I am not sure what you are trying to say?

I also checked (all three of the books released) and there's no psionic powers anywhere in Dead Reign. (Something that genuinely surprised me, but then again it's more down to the earth and realistic) Plus, there's a high chance of finding the supplies on your own. In other words, they do not contribute anything really.

Maybe I am playing in a setting truer to the original incarnation of the game. Check out the Rifter articles. They are actually pretty good.

I don't play Rifter. I play Dead Reign. There's no electro buzzo weapons or such anywhere. You're in the wrong place and arguing using logic that doesn't apply to this game.

That's like me going to the fantasy section and complaining why I can't use my machine gun to mow down the orcs.

Rifter isn't a game..... It is a magazine published by Palladium books. It is full of useful source material for the majority of their games.

Yeah, basically it comes down to shoot the girl, ignore the girl, or restrain the girl if possible to do safely. Personally, I'd err on her being a child zombie as the chances of a little girl surviving on her own alone in a zombie apocalypse without some kind of training or guidance is near zero. The whole humanitarian "don't shoot the girl, she might be an innocent living being just wondering the street looking for mommy" doesn't hold up given the scenario we are dealing with.

Likewise, people with that kind of non-logical humanitarian outlook are the people that didn't survive the zombie apocalypse. Why? Because the zombies ate them when they probably thought the exact same thing about a beaten up loved one or a neighbor. In fact, doesn't it make this a rather clear point in the main book somewhere?

Yes, from page 8 and forward we get the details of the little girls being killed and such. People with non logical humanitarian outlook (I am totally stealing that description since it's awesome) would NOT be survivors, they would have been one of the first people to be infected. The idea that someone playing perfect "boysocut" would survive the entire apocalypse unscratched is just illogical.

You should especially read page 10 if you're thinking about army going around killing zombies and saving little girls as viable options.

Again……..
You are right. The Army as an effective military force is nonexistent. But since there is a class in the book called “Apocalyptic SOLDIER” I am sure that at least 1 former military operative is alive. In fact I would venture a guess that there would be a few small groups of former soldiers/Marines/Airman/Sailors that might have banded together to defend their families or communities. And since old habits/ skills die hard, they would probably use military tactics, equipment, chain of command…… at least on a smaller scale. Not to mention I am sure several former cops and SWAT members would probably do the same. So yes the 10 mountain Div. isn’t going to be marching on Yonkers to push the Zeds back, but a squad or 2 may be running around trying to survive and maybe help out others that they find.

Yes, yes, that's basically what I meant. Honestly, the miliatry is less miliatry than reapers at the moment because the reapers are more banded and have better equipment that they've scavenged, whereareas the best army weaponry and such are the ones that were initially lost and most of them have either become useless or run out of ammo by now.

So why would the military survivors run out of ammo before your precious Reapers? You realize that using the setting as described by Kevin, their would be plenty of ammo, weapons and food for the taking.

Trooper Jim I agree with you that children are not useless, though keep in mind Dobergirl is strictly speaking within the context of the immediate zombie survival situation. I don't think she's going to disagree with you that children are good for making sure there's actual people still around in the future who are ideally not death cultists. Also, I understand that her statement "shouldn't be alive" seems overly harsh. It's missing the necessary context to properly frame the statement so it is coming off as being an overall outlook instead of a situational one.

I understand your point. I am just trying to get people to move past the mindless kill it all mentality. once you do that, your RPG experience will improve 10 fold.

I don't kill all. Again, this entire scenario is not possible on any level without it being a trap or zombie or worse. Seriously, no matter how you try to think, there's no getting past it, this entire scenario is built around that the girl should be killed.

Your opinion, not mine,

Trooper jim, that's the whole problem .. You're not playing Dead Reign in a setting that is actually how DEAD REIGN (the ks Version) is supposed to work.

heck the DR Zombies are super badasses that destroy anything short of super soldiers in minutes.
Not even Superheroes would last in Dead reign because of all the nigh invulnerabilities they have.
Most people I met that have played Dead Reign just use the rifter version of them period.
but you never specified this in your original post.

Neither did the OP. But the KS version is ridiculous. The Zeds are way way to tough, and the weapons have been nerfed to high hell. As written it is almost unplayable. I am not going to enjoy a game where the character i have spent 2 hours making, get whacked 20 min. Into the game. I think it stems from Kevin not knowing the first thing about the genre.

Or, you have no idea how to play it and go around playing rambo or rifter frenzy with your powers you don't have. Of course you get killed! You are doing it wrong!

Once again you are not clear.

[Dobergirl]

I'm just going to go over a few things you seem to not be taking into account.

Standard US Army Infantryman Issue, Circa 1995 when I enlisted was as follows.
11/A: M-16A2/ 7 Mags, Field Radio, First Aid Kit, 2 Doses of Atropine(Sp?), 2 Smoke Grenades, 4 Fragmentation Grenades, 3 Signal Flares(Green) 2 Signal Flares(Red). 1 Bayonet(Your survival knife if you want to think of it that way) Optional: Underslung Colt M203 Grenade Launcher/ 15 Rounds of 40MM grenades. Or a Remington 870(Modified underslung) shotgun/ 30 rounds(Divide 15 00Buck/Slug)

11/B As above, minus radio, 6 Frag Grenades, 4 Smoke Grenades, 6 Flares(green) 3 Flares(Red), 3 Flares(white)

11/C M249 SAW(Squad Automatic Weapon) with 10 30 Rd Mags, rest same as 11/B

11/D M-21 Sniper rifle/Scope 7 30Rd Mags. rest as above.

That's nice and all but unless you were given these things to your home, I don't see how exactly you'd be in posession of them. If you would have been in HQ with access to these weapons during the zombie apocalypse, you would have been first of people to die, acoarding to the manual. What you have, are items you probably had at home or civilian life, like a hunting rifle or something like that.

Unless for some reason miliatry is giving SAWS and Sniper Rifle or you smuggled them to your home but honestly, I don't find that plausible.

As a Solider you would begin with better equipment since you were already in possession of it. The fact that the DR book is utterly ignorant of Military advantages is one of the things that makes it unplayable.

You are very biased on the soldier character because how you are describing it, it would be over powered beyond belief. That would not make for a well rounded or a fun game.

2nd:
If a unit of soldiers, or ex soldiers(Which as one I would be in) each and everyone of them understands the UCMJ(or parts of it at least). By being in the group they pretty much agree to be bound by it. Summary Execution is a part of the UCMJ, it is the duty of the officer in charge to perform and maintain Discipline in the Field. In events were the CO is unable, or unwilling to do so, it falls on the next in command, who is likewise bound by them, and so on. Killing a unarmed girl is murder, a violation of the UCMJ, and the Geneva Conventions which soldiers are suppose to be honorbound by. The UCMJ provides a penalty for this crime(Murder of civilians), would you like to know what it is? Death. Under the Articles of the UCMJ as a member of the squad I am bound to obey if one of my teamates executes a little girl, it is my responsibility to arrest and detain him if in a non-combat situation. In combat it is completely acceptable for me to perform a Summary Execution. Once back to base there's a form I have to fill out, along with the others of my squad. The UCMJ also calls for the execution of the Commanding officer for Dereliction of Duty in wartime if he isn't the one to pull the trigger, or order the execution, or detainment of the Criminal.

I don't think you understand what the meaning of zombie apocalypse means. Geneva conventions and UCMJ don't matter any more, there's no elected officials or anything like that around any more.

3rd I'd never be with the reapers. I find them unrealistic. They are, according to the fluff a motorcycle gang. For some reason, I just can't see the Hell's Angels doing stuff like the Reapers do in the DR book, it makes no sense. Period. Furthermore, the Reapers Guide completely disregards logic, tactical knowledge, and other aspects that make it unbelievable. I understand what KS was going for, an in world character voice to tell the story of the world to readers. However it wasn't really needed. It's zombies, we get it, we already know about them, we all play Resident Evil, watch Dawn of the Dead, etc.

So, then you have even less authority. You're just some person who tries to come kill me, you have no right to make any accustasions and you'd be laughed in face if you'd start bringing stuff like Geneva convections during time when people kill each others over the most mundane things. That is not even counting in the death cults or the crazies.

4th: The game is unplayable as written due to a number of reasons, none of them are overcome due to the bonuses a Reaper gets for their OCC. The Zed's natural AR means they are as armored as a Armored Vehicle.

The whole point of the AR is that zombies can take out almost anything you dish out at them. They don't feel regular pain and if you chop parts off, they still keep coming back at you. Zombies ARE hard to kill and that's very much the entire purpose of this whole game, not you being able to kill zombies by the thousands.

Also, it's hard but decapitating a zombie is the best thing to do if you are skilled enough.

To put that into prospective drive by the nation guard armory. See those tank like things they have parked out back? Yeah a Zed is more armored then that.
Doesn't make any sense does it?

It does and here is why.

Zombies are not living people. You shoot it in the body, it doesn't feel that. The point of the high AR is not that they're bouncing off the zombie but rather that all they do is minimal damage to the foe.

Zed's aren't suppose to be hard to kill, that's not what the problem fighting them is.

They ARE supposed to be hard to kill, that's the entire idea behind Dead Reign.

No it's numbers that are the problem. there are many times over there numbers to your own. DR completely got this wrong.

Um, have you ever even seen zombie movie? Or read a book? Or anything?


Zombies ARE majority over humans, that is why it's called "zombie apocalypse" because majority of humanity is dead. That is NOT getting it wrong but totally like it is.

And yes I realize that the Zombie's AR is not actual armor, but a measurement of how they are generally immune to damage that does not effect their skulls. Regardless, because you can blast a Zombie in the mainbody, reduce it to zero and the Zed is out of commission, effectively nullifies the logic behind the zombies AR. If it was only damage to the skull/brain that mattered then that would be different. But even then an AR would not be needed, as any attack not aimed for the head would be pointless.

Zombie is not out of comission if you blast holes in its body. You reduce the AR by half and expose their HP though. But a zombie that you've shot their mainbody to swiss cheese is still not down.

5th: The Rifter isn't for Rifts. It's a quarterly magazine(sourcebook) that Palladium puts out, that includes material(Admittedly option, but often official material as well) for all of it's game lines. Rifter# 40 & 45 are in fact where DR originally appeared(and at an open house before even that under a different name). Many players(myself included) prefer that version of the game to what was published, and we incorporate it into the game, because as written DR is unplayable.

Ah.
nd on better tactical terms, I'd warn others of my former group, and enlist a posse to capture and punish them for murder.[/quote]

I actually did the Little Girl Scenario in a Zombie High school game. the players Rescued her, Cause the Monster with his monster tentacles was coming out from the ceiling and pipes....
And they had gear to Deal with zombies.
Mind you this setting was more HEROMAN meets "DEAD HIGH SCHOOL" but it was dramatic non the less.

Being unable to detect a zombie means you're not gonna mess with an extra body in a survival group.
you'd throw her some ration, move on.

I don't see how personally people can think this, especially of a child.

Now I've argued in other threads about the naivete of trusting everyone you meet, especially on the radio and such. However this situation is a different beast altogether.

Also refusing to take in children or pregnant women(as seems to be the trend on the threads here) is short term survival thinking, which in an Apocalypse set in our modern world is very, very foolish.

Yes both require more resources, but the thing is, those resources are everywhere, easy to get to, and don't add up to as much as many seem to be thinking.

Personally I would think save any that you can, so long as they don't pose a danger to the group, and can be trusted. I know some will point out that children make lots of noise and thus are a danger to the group. To that I say think about it for a moment. A zombie can sense you in a house, whether you make noise or not. Children are fast learners, if they know that making a lot of noise will attract the hordes of flesh eating undead cannibals, they will be quiet. Not infants of course since they have no understanding of the situation, but older children would. However if we toss babies to the hordes to save our own skin, is humanity, and indeed our lives even worth saving? Survival is fine, but at some point you are simply waiting to die, not living as a human should live.

Dig up your history links on the Middle Kingdom of egypt. Some Calamity caused massive deforestation and starvation all over the known world. People were EATING THEIR BABIES - only the strong would survive. any kid who got sick, any adult that got sick, became food. Water rations only went to the healthy. You are only thinking this way because we're surrounded by everything and have morals from the viewpoint where resources are not scarce. and quite frankly, The girl would probably be taken, and sold to a religious community since survivors are not too hellbent on recreating society then escaping the next raid.


Now which is worse, Killing the girl, Saving her only to sell her later on, or losing half your team to a zombie trap?...

Unfortunately you example of Ancient Egypt doesn't apply to this debate. Here's why.

In the event of a zombie Apocalypse, food will be in abundance, as will things like ammunition, medical supplies, etc. Modern manufacturing has ensured that their are more goods then people on this planet even with it filled to the brim. In a Zed Apocalypse, there are less people, therefore less demand for goods

There are also animals that go around eating food, things are lost due to spoilage, and most of our food are in places like super marts and such. These places almost always also have zombies, which is why the whole thing is called scavenging.

Can Goods for example have an indefinite shelf life. they may not taste very good past the date, but it isn't an expiration date, not by a long shot. Dried White rice likewise has indefinite shelf life. Flour, sugar, dry goods? The same, if sealed, they'll be safe to eat for at least a hundred years, if not longer.

You're right in that actually. However, despite how good expiration date, there are critters like rodents and the conditions in where they're kept are not same as the ones we have right now. Maggots and other animals also find their way to the food and so does bacteria.

So my viewpoint that resources are indefinite is the correct one in this situation.

There are lots of people. Food production is not as effective as before. People are starving.


Your viewpoint couldn't be more wrong.

If all else fails, I can hunt. Stopping at a book store produces books on edible plants for those that don't already have this knowledge. I can scavenge for anything I need. Less people, means less demand on the environment, and more resources for me and whomever I'm with.

Again, that's one of the main aspects of the game. Helping people establish farm communities and such is also a way, and securing them.

But my thought process and viewpoint is a reflection of the times. I am a person from the Modern Era, complete with Morals and ethics created from that time. I suspect some might throw away those ethics easily enough, but not I. While I will defend myself, and my family, not to mention I'd be the least trusting person on the planet, I'm not going to become a slaver, murderer, or rapist.

I am not slaver or rapist. Murderer, I don't like to kill but in place like the zombie apocalypse, it's esential. You can't start having moral dilemmas around death cultist.

A bandit? Perhaps, but a bandits goal is to take what you have, not your life. And why expose myself and my family to the risk of infection, theft, rape or murder when I can just as easily fortify my residence, make raids into the surrounding area, and hold out indefinitely? We might all be eating Macaroni and cheese, and ramen noodles three times a day, but we're eating, and whats more, we haven't become a monster.

You'd become malnourished on nutrition diet like that but if we ignore that, you would run out of the rations within the first month. Even if you would have made your stand in super mart, the store would run out of supplies and you would find yourself hungry again.

Before getting to Trooper Jim, I'd like to go back to Horizon911 who's post I finally had time to figure out.

Hey Dobergirl.....How ya doing? So I will let Horizon911 defend himself, I am just going to address your points that were directed at me, OK thanks.

Hey Jim, I'm doing good thanks! How about you?

OK i am quickly growing weary of the whole "kill the pregnant woman or child" mentality of some of your guys characters.

A pregnant woman is two lives, herself and the baby. A child is one. That is not same thing at all and I am not sure if zombies can get pregnant. (In some movies they can, but maybe someone more well versed can answer if the zombies in Dead Reign can reproduce?)

No, Zeds don’t reproduce in the traditional manner, they reproduce by killing you. But any ways this was a direct comment on a previous post, where some folks were talking about killing off a PC, that was a pregnant stripper. They sited a myriad of reasons, most equally asinine.

Again, a pregnant woman is two lives, it is not equal comparision and seeing as zombies can't get pregnant you say, it's clear that the person would be a human from the belly alone.


That wouldn't put her in clear yet though, could just as well be any of the human baddies.

OK lets just forget the stupid pregnant lady thing. That comment was in direct response to a completely different thread. So just forget I said anything.

Fair enough.

I kind of thought the whole point of the game is humanity surviving the zombie apocalypse and rebuilding. How can we survive as a species if you kill the future generations?

I am not on some sort of spree killing children. It's just one child who shouldn't even be alive honestly speaking. Killing her would not be "killing future genearions". By teh way, my character has children too. Many of the group I hang out with are mothers and fathers who are doing what they do exactly for the future generations.

So who decides if someone “ shouldn’t even be alive”. What if my character has spent weeks and months surviving his way through Zed infested territory. But as soon as he is spotted by a group of survivors, he is gunned down……”Well he was deep in zombie country and he shouldn’t have survived…so we shot him”. Right on that is sound logic.

Majority decides. If majority say we shoot, we shoot. If minority say we shoot, we investigate. But I'm going to be honest, in almost all the situations shooting is almost always the majority.

Since you are hell bent on interjecting your brand of reality into this game, I am going to do the same. Majority rule doesn't work in a combat situation. You have to have a clearly defined chain of command. While you and your Reaper buddies are taking a secret ballot to determine your next course of action, you will get flanked and terminated with extreme prejudice.

This isn't combat situation. It has potential to turn to one but it isn't one yet.

My character would probably of killed anyone that tried to kill the child without investigating it first. But he has a strong personal belief in what is right and what and what is wrong.

Your character is a hypocrite and should be played as evil. For saying he has strong belief of what is right and wrong, you think it's okay to MURDER your friend just because of a mistake like that? Like people pointed out, that would probably start a gunfight and soon everyone was dead. That's not really a thing good aligned character would do. Even if for some reason this wouldn't cause rebute from you killing a fellow person, I'd make you become evil in aligment for balant murder and your reputation would be tarnished for ages to come.

But even if for some reason no one bats an eye of balant murder and such, you've just wasted a person who can actually do something and you have now two bodies. I'd like to see you explain this to the family of the person you killed with your good guy

"Well, Billy killed a girl who may have been a zombie. I didn't like that, so I killed him. Then again, I have strong belief in what is right and wrong."

Actually he is an evil alignment. But did you read what I said? WITH OUT INVESTIGATING!!!!!!!! If she is determined to be a zombie, yes kill it. But if she is a survivor, then no, don’t kill her. The Players should be resourceful enough to come up with a way to conduct the investigation while minimizing risk to themselves. That is sort part of the point of Role-Playing games, isn’t it?
You are right about that Billy’s killing causing strife in the group. But if Billy is a homicidal maniac that kills everyone he sees, before he figures out if they are alive or not. He probably won’t be missed much.

So wait, he's an evil aligment character who has strong belif in what is right and wrong? How the hell does that even work?

Here you go.

Aberrant (Evil)
The cliche that there is "No honor among thieves ." is false when dealing with the aberrant character. This is a person who is driven to attain his goals through force, power, and intimidation. Yet the aberrant person stands apart from the norm, with his own, personal code of ethics (although twisted ethics by the standards of good). He expects loyalty from his minions, punishing disloyalty and treachery with a swift, merciful death. An aberrant person will always keep his word of honor and uphold
any bargains. He will define his terms and live by them, whether anyone else likes it or not.
Aberrant Characters Will ...
1.Always keep his word of honor (he is honorable) .
2.Lie to and cheat those not worthy of his respect.
3.Mayor may not kill an unarmed foe.
4.Not kill (may harm, kidnap) an innocent, particularly a child.
5.Never kills for pleasure.
6.Not resort to inhumane treatment of prisoners, but torture, although distasteful, is a necessary means of extracting information.
7.Never torture for pleasure.
8.Mayor may not help someone in need.
9.Work with others to attain his goals.
10.Respect honor and self-discipline.
11.Never betray a friend.

Yeah, few posts back I talked about that.

And as a GM, there would be consequences for the "shoot first" mentality. Oh wait that child you cleaved in two with your chainsaw.........yea she turned out to be the missing child of another reaper gang or surviving military unit. And guess what, her father and his group were looking for the child and rounded the corner in time to watch you MURDER her, oops. Yea that might lead to a tense moment or two.

Reapers value life over everything but despise zombies enough to choose death always over becoming one. A reaper would understand if you killed the girl, it was not a pleasant action but if she was a risk of becoming one or may have already been one, they'd probably kill her by themself anyway.

It would really depend on the reaper group. And for S and Gs i would be willing to bet that some half arsed biker thugs would probably lose that fight.

I have no idea what you're talking about with the S and G's, is that some sort of gang talk?

And all reapers again, value life over others. It says so right in the book that they'd rather kill themself or their loved one than to see them as zombie. Again, a fellow reaper would totally believe another reaper having done "the right thing."

Lol, no it isn't a gang thing. I was trying to find a P.C. Way of saying Sheets and grins.....sheets meaning another way of saying poopie.........

Sheets? Grins? Okay seriously, what?

There's no organized miliatry units. Again, the army is MIA.

You are right. The Army as an effective military force is nonexistent. But since there is a class in the book called “Apocalyptic SOLDIER” I am sure that at least 1 former military operative is alive. In fact I would venture a guess that there would be a few small groups of former soldiers/Marines/Airman/Sailors that might have banded together to defend their families or communities. And since old habits/ skills die hard, they would probably use military tactics, equipment, chain of command…… at least on a smaller scale. Not to mention I am sure several former cops and SWAT members would probably do the same. So yes the 10th mountain Div. isn’t going to be marching on Yonkers to push the Zeds back, but a squad or 2 may be running around trying to survive and maybe help out others that they find.

I'm going to quote the book

"While one may think these soldiers left on their own might degenerate into warlords, gang leaders and thugs, most have not. Instead they are highly motivated to maintain order, save lives and kill zombies."

Notice emphasis on the bolded area? Now, tell me how going to gunfight with reapers would help save lives or kill zombies? In fact, I'm pretty sure it'd cost lives and make killing zombies harder.

Kevin has a twisted view of the military and I personally don't prescribe to his skewed version of how members of the military would operate in this setting.

Ah, I see. Fair enough, I suppose.

Or maybe the child has some kind of special ability or knowledge the group would find useful. Perhaps she has some psi powers that allow her to pass by zeds undetected. Perhaps she also knows the location of some nearby supplies or survivors. Just sayin.........

I am going to break your bubble again but kids are not useful like in movies and comics really. If anything, they take tons of time and nurture for them to grow up into strong people. In a time of zombie apocalypse, neither is really all that avaivable. To get a girl, would require a lot of time from some other survivors as well as more mouths to feed. And to prevent her from being totally useless in later years, time must be spent on educating and training her. Again, consuming time and resources.

Ok so kill all the kids. I mean all they do is eat and poop. They have no useful skills at all.

The situation of finding impossible survivor is totally diffent, please don't make comparisions like that.

I am not sure what you are trying to say?

Don't compare killing all children to killing a child that is creepy and acts like zombie. There's world of difference.

I also checked (all three of the books released) and there's no psionic powers anywhere in Dead Reign. (Something that genuinely surprised me, but then again it's more down to the earth and realistic) Plus, there's a high chance of finding the supplies on your own. In other words, they do not contribute anything really.

Maybe I am playing in a setting truer to the original incarnation of the game. Check out the Rifter articles. They are actually pretty good.

I don't play Rifter. I play Dead Reign. There's no electro buzzo weapons or such anywhere. You're in the wrong place and arguing using logic that doesn't apply to this game.

That's like me going to the fantasy section and complaining why I can't use my machine gun to mow down the orcs.

Rifter isn't a game..... It is a magazine published by Palladium books. It is full of useful source material for the majority of their games.

Yes, I was informed of this.

Yeah, basically it comes down to shoot the girl, ignore the girl, or restrain the girl if possible to do safely. Personally, I'd err on her being a child zombie as the chances of a little girl surviving on her own alone in a zombie apocalypse without some kind of training or guidance is near zero. The whole humanitarian "don't shoot the girl, she might be an innocent living being just wondering the street looking for mommy" doesn't hold up given the scenario we are dealing with.

Likewise, people with that kind of non-logical humanitarian outlook are the people that didn't survive the zombie apocalypse. Why? Because the zombies ate them when they probably thought the exact same thing about a beaten up loved one or a neighbor. In fact, doesn't it make this a rather clear point in the main book somewhere?

Yes, from page 8 and forward we get the details of the little girls being killed and such. People with non logical humanitarian outlook (I am totally stealing that description since it's awesome) would NOT be survivors, they would have been one of the first people to be infected. The idea that someone playing perfect "boysocut" would survive the entire apocalypse unscratched is just illogical.

You should especially read page 10 if you're thinking about army going around killing zombies and saving little girls as viable options.

Again……..
You are right. The Army as an effective military force is nonexistent. But since there is a class in the book called “Apocalyptic SOLDIER” I am sure that at least 1 former military operative is alive. In fact I would venture a guess that there would be a few small groups of former soldiers/Marines/Airman/Sailors that might have banded together to defend their families or communities. And since old habits/ skills die hard, they would probably use military tactics, equipment, chain of command…… at least on a smaller scale. Not to mention I am sure several former cops and SWAT members would probably do the same. So yes the 10 mountain Div. isn’t going to be marching on Yonkers to push the Zeds back, but a squad or 2 may be running around trying to survive and maybe help out others that they find.

Yes, yes, that's basically what I meant. Honestly, the miliatry is less miliatry than reapers at the moment because the reapers are more banded and have better equipment that they've scavenged, whereareas the best army weaponry and such are the ones that were initially lost and most of them have either become useless or run out of ammo by now.

So why would the military survivors run out of ammo before your precious Reapers? You realize that using the setting as described by Kevin, their would be plenty of ammo, weapons and food for the taking.

Because weapon like SAW does not use easy to come by ammunition, wherareas Reapers use weapons that use ammo you'd expect to find in most places.

Trooper Jim I agree with you that children are not useless, though keep in mind Dobergirl is strictly speaking within the context of the immediate zombie survival situation. I don't think she's going to disagree with you that children are good for making sure there's actual people still around in the future who are ideally not death cultists. Also, I understand that her statement "shouldn't be alive" seems overly harsh. It's missing the necessary context to properly frame the statement so it is coming off as being an overall outlook instead of a situational one.

I understand your point. I am just trying to get people to move past the mindless kill it all mentality. once you do that, your RPG experience will improve 10 fold.

I don't kill all. Again, this entire scenario is not possible on any level without it being a trap or zombie or worse. Seriously, no matter how you try to think, there's no getting past it, this entire scenario is built around that the girl should be killed.

Your opinion, not mine,

Ok.

Trooper jim, that's the whole problem .. You're not playing Dead Reign in a setting that is actually how DEAD REIGN (the ks Version) is supposed to work.

heck the DR Zombies are super badasses that destroy anything short of super soldiers in minutes.
Not even Superheroes would last in Dead reign because of all the nigh invulnerabilities they have.
Most people I met that have played Dead Reign just use the rifter version of them period.
but you never specified this in your original post.

Neither did the OP. But the KS version is ridiculous. The Zeds are way way to tough, and the weapons have been nerfed to high hell. As written it is almost unplayable. I am not going to enjoy a game where the character i have spent 2 hours making, get whacked 20 min. Into the game. I think it stems from Kevin not knowing the first thing about the genre.

Or, you have no idea how to play it and go around playing rambo or rifter frenzy with your powers you don't have. Of course you get killed! You are doing it wrong!

Once again you are not clear.

You say you get whacked so soon. That makes me think you are trying to fight a zombie like you'd fight a zombie in something like Dead Island. In this game, that sort of "stragegy" would have you be killed that fast. It's not about not knowing genre, it's about making a game where the zombies are the threat you see in George Romero movies. The only time you see many zombies killed is when the survivors have made extensive procedures to make equipment for zombie slaying.

This isn't meant to be played like Left for Dead or any of those multiplayer zombie slashers, is what I mean.

[Trooper Jim]

I'm just going to go over a few things you seem to not be taking into account.

Standard US Army Infantryman Issue, Circa 1995 when I enlisted was as follows.
11/A: M-16A2/ 7 Mags, Field Radio, First Aid Kit, 2 Doses of Atropine(Sp?), 2 Smoke Grenades, 4 Fragmentation Grenades, 3 Signal Flares(Green) 2 Signal Flares(Red). 1 Bayonet(Your survival knife if you want to think of it that way) Optional: Underslung Colt M203 Grenade Launcher/ 15 Rounds of 40MM grenades. Or a Remington 870(Modified underslung) shotgun/ 30 rounds(Divide 15 00Buck/Slug)

11/B As above, minus radio, 6 Frag Grenades, 4 Smoke Grenades, 6 Flares(green) 3 Flares(Red), 3 Flares(white)

11/C M249 SAW(Squad Automatic Weapon) with 10 30 Rd Mags, rest same as 11/B

11/D M-21 Sniper rifle/Scope 7 30Rd Mags. rest as above.

That's nice and all but unless you were given these things to your home, I don't see how exactly you'd be in posession of them. If you would have been in HQ with access to these weapons during the zombie apocalypse, you would have been first of people to die, acoarding to the manual. What you have, are items you probably had at home or civilian life, like a hunting rifle or something like that.

Unless for some reason miliatry is giving SAWS and Sniper Rifle or you smuggled them to your home but honestly, I don't find that plausible.

I could see if your were deployed with a squad, you would have this equipment. None of these weapons are really that overpowering at all. If the player could give me an intelligent reason I would allow them to start with this equipment. And for the record the M21 is readily available as the M1a1. I could drive down to my local gun store, plop down the cash and walk out the door with one. I also know that if you posses the proper BATF paperwork you could posses a M249 SAW. So it isn't imposable for someone to have these weapons. Actually almost all of this equipment is available through surplus stores.

2nd:
If a unit of soldiers, or ex soldiers(Which as one I would be in) each and everyone of them understands the UCMJ(or parts of it at least). By being in the group they pretty much agree to be bound by it. Summary Execution is a part of the UCMJ, it is the duty of the officer in charge to perform and maintain Discipline in the Field. In events were the CO is unable, or unwilling to do so, it falls on the next in command, who is likewise bound by them, and so on. Killing a unarmed girl is murder, a violation of the UCMJ, and the Geneva Conventions which soldiers are suppose to be honorbound by. The UCMJ provides a penalty for this crime(Murder of civilians), would you like to know what it is? Death. Under the Articles of the UCMJ as a member of the squad I am bound to obey if one of my teamates executes a little girl, it is my responsibility to arrest and detain him if in a non-combat situation. In combat it is completely acceptable for me to perform a Summary Execution. Once back to base there's a form I have to fill out, along with the others of my squad. The UCMJ also calls for the execution of the Commanding officer for Dereliction of Duty in wartime if he isn't the one to pull the trigger, or order the execution, or detainment of the Criminal.

I don't think you understand what the meaning of zombie apocalypse means. Geneva conventions and UCMJ don't matter any more, there's no elected officials or anything like that around any more.

Yes you are right, none of these things actually exist anymore. But they are so ingrained into the psyche of the average soldier that they would probably act as if they still did, at least for awhile.

4th: The game is unplayable as written due to a number of reasons, none of them are overcome due to the bonuses a Reaper gets for their OCC. The Zed's natural AR means they are as armored as a Armored Vehicle.

The whole point of the AR is that zombies can take out almost anything you dish out at them. They don't feel regular pain and if you chop parts off, they still keep coming back at you. Zombies ARE hard to kill and that's very much the entire purpose of this whole game, not you being able to kill zombies by the thousands.

Also, it's hard but decapitating a zombie is the best thing to do if you are skilled enough.

I will have to disagree. The individual zombie isn't that hard to kill. This has been demonstrated several times in multiple films and books. Where you get into trouble is when run into several of them. If the converge on you your are a goner. A Zed shouldn't be tougher then an Abrams tank. And lets also not forget that KS nerfed the hell out of most modern weapons in this game for no reason other then making it impossible to whack a zombie.

No it's numbers that are the problem. there are many times over there numbers to your own. DR completely got this wrong.

Um, have you ever even seen zombie movie? Or read a book? Or anything?

Actually I have....several of them. Most of the times you see a lone zombie take someone out it is either due to the victim not knowing that the zombie is a zombie, of the zombie is hiding or sneaks up undetected on the victim.

So why would the military survivors run out of ammo before your precious Reapers? You realize that using the setting as described by Kevin, their would be plenty of ammo, weapons and food for the taking.

Because weapon like SAW does not use easy to come by ammunition, wherareas Reapers use weapons that use ammo you'd expect to find in most places.

Actually the M249 fires the standard 5.56mm NATO round, the exact same bullet as the M16 series of weapons. And if I am not mistaken the can also use the same 30 round magazine as the M16, the just stick out of the side instead of the bottom.

You say you get whacked so soon. That makes me think you are trying to fight a zombie like you'd fight a zombie in something like Dead Island. In this game, that sort of "stragegy" would have you be killed that fast. It's not about not knowing genre, it's about making a game where the zombies are the threat you see in George Romero movies. The only time you see many zombies killed is when the survivors have made extensive procedures to make equipment for zombie slaying.

This isn't meant to be played like Left for Dead or any of those multiplayer zombie slashers, is what I mean.

I once again feel the need to state that in almost every incarnation of zombie film or book I have come across, the individual zombie is weak. Look at the Walking Dead as an example. Those guys are running around head shoting Zeds like it is going out of style. Where they get into serous poopie is when a whole bunch show up.

[Ravenwing]

Omg! the stupid quote thingy is driving me crazy!

'You can only embed five quotes'

Grrrr. Curse you silly thing!

Why can't it be a gun, that I understand

[Colt47]

Omg! the stupid quote thingy is driving me crazy!

'You can only embed five quotes'

Grrrr. Curse you silly thing!

Why can't it be a gun, that I understand

Yup, and this thread just keeps on coming back for more so there's an almost never ending supply of quotes.

As far as the discussion of KS's version of zombies being too difficult to kill I'm going to say yes. The zombies in KS's version of Dead Reign seem like they shouldn't even cosmetically be standard zombies, but some kind of thick skinned scab warrior with exceptional high damage thresh-holds. Think of a undead zombie with rugged skin as thick as a rhinoceros with bits of bone sticking out here and there, drooling as they cross the landscape, and that is the kind of critter I'm getting from the statistics on closer inspection.

The real zombie is more like an ant farm. Each individual ant isn't that strong and could be taken down by any number of things. However, have enough ants swarm and even a human being is going to stay the heck away from them. Also, most zombies are about as strong as the human that they were created from. The reason they can overtake someone with the same level of strength is because they don't tire out and can continuously exert themselves.

[Ravenwing]

lol, REsources will not last forever. Dried food can and frequently does, get rot, mold, or eaten by critters.
Water ways will get infected either with waste, Bacteria, or Even Zombie parasites.
Alll the material in World War ZED is totally, Absolutely Useless in Dead Reign.

It all depends on the nature of zombie infestation, and in Dead Reign, It's at Full Climax, to the point where there are now intelligent and Mutant Zombies who can CONTROL PARASITES running about. You won't be able to access anything as a guarantee. There is no cure, no End to the zombie apocalypse in Dead Reign as the setting is written, because after all, its' not a virus, it's an invasion linked to the flows of magic and an otherwordly presence. The fact that the zombies will stick to Leylines and population centers is your only good thing. Not Even being in an island is secure, because, The zombies do not need to shuffle, they just .. Appear. Likely because they'll be directed to Rift Activity to Teleport where ever humans are gathered.

I never read World War Zed. The shelf life I listed is from the department of homeland defense's webpage for survival situations. As well as the survival knowledge I have

Also you're adding in bits from the Rifter. Remember in DR, there is no magic, psionics, leylines, and the Zeds certainly can't teleport.

[Ravenwing]

Ok, since it wont let me quote, and I'm about as computer savy as an iguana, I'm just going to answer your post in number order Dober, here goes.

1) You wouldn't need the gear at home, you would have it with you with the Zedpoyclse broke out. Thus as a infantryman, you'd have your nice M-16, SAW, Bayonet, etc. And that is part of my point as well, the Soldiers wouldn't have died, they have eliminated the Zeds as they rose, because they are better armed, trained, and experienced.

2) It isn't bias, it's logic. you can depict the military as bumbling idiots who don't know which end of a rifle to point at the enemy, while portraying a band of thugs and criminals(the reapers) as heroes. Or, you can apply a little bit of logic and realize that things in the DR book are just written with no regard for anything approaching RL, and ignore it.

3) Having spent a career following and obeying the UCMJ and Geneva Conventions, it isn't likely that they will just stop following them. Again Ethics and morals arent so easily tossed aside.

4) Not being with a group of Reapers, and with a squad of fellow soldiers the CoC does apply, as does the UCMJ. So your thinking on the Summary Execution is invalid.

5) My example was under the assumption that you had already reduced both SDC and HP, thus rendering the Zombie out of commission. However the fact that Zed's have HP is a gross misunderstanding of them. Hit Points represent Life points, and Zombies are dead(Undead) they shouldn't have HP period. Zombies should be treated like any other inanimate object, and have SDC alone. Also like I pointed out previously, the fact that a zombie can only be killed is by destroying the Brain renders the need for a AR moot. Unless an attack is targeted against the head, it can not kill the zombie. Because of this fact, AR isn't needed.

6) No Zombies are not suppose to be hard to kill, since they are reanimated corpses, there flesh does not suddenly become stronger then iron.

7) Your arguing by restating what I said. Zombies outnumber people. Thats what makes them dangerous, not some insane AR, or difficulty in killing them. Kill a dozen of them and you still have to deal with five dozen more.

[Dobergirl]

You do realize that you can totally bypass the entire AR check by shooting them closer? The closer the zombie, the more bonuses you get to strike and their AR isn't really helping when they're close to you, you get +7 at close range and they have no AR at point blank range.

[Colt47]

Dobergirl is referring to Bonuses to strike zombies that appear in Dead Reign Book 2.
without those rules in play, killing zombiese is nigh impossible with your M16A1.

Aren't there already penalties to strike targets that are significantly far away presented in the palladium system?

[Ravenwing]

You do realize that you can totally bypass the entire AR check by shooting them closer? The closer the zombie, the more bonuses you get to strike and their AR isn't really helping when they're close to you, you get +7 at close range and they have no AR at point blank range.

And you realize that only compounds the problem and proves that the Zed's AR is broken, and unrealistic.

why is it that the Zombie's AR is nullified the closer I am? If I'm using a pistol, or a shotgun at close range, this makes some sense. Both are short ranged weapons and thus should be more effective at close range. But a rifle? Not unless your using a CQW like a Submachine gun, or a M-4A2 would you relish the idea of close combat. But regardless of my firearm, distance suddenly makes the Zombies AR less effective? Really? And here I was under the impression that ballistics determined that fact, which was determined by the firearm I choose.

And even then, Melee weapons don't enjoy this sudden lose to the Zombies AR, it applies only to guns. Like many others I stand by my statements that the AR of Zombies just makes no sense.

although I think I maybe one of the few that noticed the Zombies in the DR Rifter Article have a higher AR then as published. However the Rifter DR did not impose penalties for head shots, beyond the standard PB firearms rules, and gave each zed 1 HP.

[Ravenwing]

Dobergirl is referring to Bonuses to strike zombies that appear in Dead Reign Book 2.
without those rules in play, killing zombiese is nigh impossible with your M16A1.

Actually she's referring to the 'Can't Miss Point Blank Rules' in the DR mainbook. Or so I thought. I don't recall any special rules in DR;2

Killing zombies with an M-16 isn't actually hard in DR. At a nifty damage of 1d4x10 for a three round burst(1d6x10 for an AK-47, or 7.62mm Rifle, PB makes no distinction between 7.62Nato, or 7.62r.) It's hitting and actually doing damage that's the trick. It goes back to that AR thing. See if KS had done it right, instead of saying AR, he would have said something like this.

'Hitting a Zombies main body does no damage, instead a head shot is needed to wound and or kill it. To simulate this in game, you are required to roll a 12 or higher to strike with ranged weapons, while melee weapon attacks require only a 8+ roll to strike. Most Zombie's can not dodge, and even fewer can parry. all damage inflicted is done to the Skull/head, when this is reduced to 0 the zombie is dead. Any roll below this results in an attack that does no damage.'

that's all it would have taken to explain how combat against zombies works. One paragraph. Bam! it's all covered.

[Ravenwing]

Dobergirl is referring to Bonuses to strike zombies that appear in Dead Reign Book 2.
without those rules in play, killing zombiese is nigh impossible with your M16A1.

Aren't there already penalties to strike targets that are significantly far away presented in the palladium system?

Only past the weapons maximum range I think. Could be wrong, this rarely comes up in my games, as we use grid maps and mini's, and a weapons range of 1800 feet would be equivalent to 360 1 inch Squares(in length). Since I don't have a playmate that large, it's kinda moot.

[Ravenwing]

lol, REsources will not last forever. Dried food can and frequently does, get rot, mold, or eaten by critters.
Water ways will get infected either with waste, Bacteria, or Even Zombie parasites.
Alll the material in World War ZED is totally, Absolutely Useless in Dead Reign.

It all depends on the nature of zombie infestation, and in Dead Reign, It's at Full Climax, to the point where there are now intelligent and Mutant Zombies who can CONTROL PARASITES running about. You won't be able to access anything as a guarantee. There is no cure, no End to the zombie apocalypse in Dead Reign as the setting is written, because after all, its' not a virus, it's an invasion linked to the flows of magic and an otherwordly presence. The fact that the zombies will stick to Leylines and population centers is your only good thing. Not Even being in an island is secure, because, The zombies do not need to shuffle, they just .. Appear. Likely because they'll be directed to Rift Activity to Teleport where ever humans are gathered.

I never read World War Zed. The shelf life I listed is from the department of homeland defense's webpage for survival situations. As well as the survival knowledge I have

Also you're adding in bits from the Rifter. Remember in DR, there is no magic, psionics, leylines, and the Zeds certainly can't teleport.

Actually there are leylines and They don't teleport but they certainly do seem to teleport.... that Zombie doubling just doesn't make sense otherwise.

I agree that the convergence doubling does seem odd and a little unrealistic, but thats where the GM's logic and commonsense comes in. A town of say...500, isn't likely to have 600000 Zombies in it. nor is it likely to have even a thousand in it, or five hundred.

I'd cap a town of five hundred at 480 Zeds. If a group managed to kill that many(And I don't use AR, or HP for my Zeds) then all they have to worry about from then on is roaming packs of zombies....... and a little girl whose shell shocked and wandering around at night

[Colt47]

lol, REsources will not last forever. Dried food can and frequently does, get rot, mold, or eaten by critters.
Water ways will get infected either with waste, Bacteria, or Even Zombie parasites.
Alll the material in World War ZED is totally, Absolutely Useless in Dead Reign.

It all depends on the nature of zombie infestation, and in Dead Reign, It's at Full Climax, to the point where there are now intelligent and Mutant Zombies who can CONTROL PARASITES running about. You won't be able to access anything as a guarantee. There is no cure, no End to the zombie apocalypse in Dead Reign as the setting is written, because after all, its' not a virus, it's an invasion linked to the flows of magic and an otherwordly presence. The fact that the zombies will stick to Leylines and population centers is your only good thing. Not Even being in an island is secure, because, The zombies do not need to shuffle, they just .. Appear. Likely because they'll be directed to Rift Activity to Teleport where ever humans are gathered.

I never read World War Zed. The shelf life I listed is from the department of homeland defense's webpage for survival situations. As well as the survival knowledge I have

Also you're adding in bits from the Rifter. Remember in DR, there is no magic, psionics, leylines, and the Zeds certainly can't teleport.

Actually there are leylines and They don't teleport but they certainly do seem to teleport.... that Zombie doubling just doesn't make sense otherwise.

I agree that the convergence doubling does seem odd and a little unrealistic, but thats where the GM's logic and commonsense comes in. A town of say...500, isn't likely to have 600000 Zombies in it. nor is it likely to have even a thousand in it, or five hundred.

I'd cap a town of five hundred at 480 Zeds. If a group managed to kill that many(And I don't use AR, or HP for my Zeds) then all they have to worry about from then on is roaming packs of zombies....... and a little girl whose shell shocked and wandering around at night

If she has a "Set us up, the bomb" T-Shirt on I'm running the other direction.

[batlchip]

I still can not believe that most of you think she could not be a survivor. I would think yall would of heard of feral children or how some( not all )children can adapt to their surroundings.I also hate to tell yall but a child or even a person could have suffered an traumatic event,lose the ability to speak and still function.

[dargo83]

i have used the OP sinario 3 times with different variations in my game the first time she was just a normal little girl that made her way out of her parents house that they were holding up in, the second one was she was an imposter zombie, and the third she was a feral child that took a chunk out of one of the PCs (my gf) arm. but in all 3 they tried to save her cause quess what they were being human unlike some of the people in this thread.

[Ravenwing]

I still can not believe that most of you think she could not be a survivor. I would think yall would of heard of feral children or how some( not all )children can adapt to their surroundings.I also hate to tell yall but a child or even a person could have suffered an traumatic event,lose the ability to speak and still function.

I explained the PTSD in an earlier post, and the effects of traumatic events on children in an earlier post(Page 2 or 3 I believe).

[cornholioprime]

I have been playing RPG for about 30yrs on and off. I have to say that I find Dead Reign to be the most interesting of the Palladium Games. Having watched a few Zombie movies and read about a few real life Disasters such as the Tsunami I tend to think that the basic problem is that people still think that the world or area they are living in is still safe, 9-5 kinda place when in fact it has suddenly become an extremally dangerous disaster area. Speaking as a GM I'm not overly convinced by a lot of the survival strategies that have been mentioned and if anything it seems to show that most people who aren't trained in scout/outdoor/survival training simply don't know what to do when they are suddenly dropped into a disaster situation. When even talking to a little girl becomes a matter of life or death then there are obviously serious problems which haven't been worked out from a RPG sense.
Not that I am saying I know what the answers are in a RPG sense but it stills seems to potential for an adventure as building a safe haven was an interesting campaign idea.
It adds an interesting roleplay aspect in that if your character doesn't know what to do, hasn't read the zombie survival guide etc, how do you roleplay that out withought everyone getting killed and the game loosing any sense of fun.

The best way is to not take it to seriously. Having said that, I am with the shoot it dead/run like heck crowed. My time tooling around the world of Palladium what ever has taught me that its never just "a little girl."

And that little bunny all alone in the forest in the middle of a pile of bones sighted isn't really a bunny, either, is it??

(Your observation made me get a humorous flashback to Monty Python and the Holy Grail....)

[Traska]

I have been playing RPG for about 30yrs on and off. I have to say that I find Dead Reign to be the most interesting of the Palladium Games. Having watched a few Zombie movies and read about a few real life Disasters such as the Tsunami I tend to think that the basic problem is that people still think that the world or area they are living in is still safe, 9-5 kinda place when in fact it has suddenly become an extremally dangerous disaster area. Speaking as a GM I'm not overly convinced by a lot of the survival strategies that have been mentioned and if anything it seems to show that most people who aren't trained in scout/outdoor/survival training simply don't know what to do when they are suddenly dropped into a disaster situation. When even talking to a little girl becomes a matter of life or death then there are obviously serious problems which haven't been worked out from a RPG sense.
Not that I am saying I know what the answers are in a RPG sense but it stills seems to potential for an adventure as building a safe haven was an interesting campaign idea.
It adds an interesting roleplay aspect in that if your character doesn't know what to do, hasn't read the zombie survival guide etc, how do you roleplay that out withought everyone getting killed and the game loosing any sense of fun.

The best way is to not take it to seriously. Having said that, I am with the shoot it dead/run like heck crowed. My time tooling around the world of Palladium what ever has taught me that its never just "a little girl."

And that little bunny all alone in the forest in the middle of a pile of bones sighted isn't really a bunny, either, is it??

(Your observation made me get a humorous flashback to Monty Python and the Holy Grail....)

And if you see a gazebo, shoot first as ask questions while shooting some more.

[Noon]

I'm just wondering why people think the 'shoot first' idea can't just as much backfire on you.