Posted: Fri Oct 06, 2006 5:09 pm Post subject: Chandra Scale (beta!!)
Hey there, lucky Magellan forumites. You get a preview of a little something I've compiled to measure invulnerabilty within the Magellan universe. I'll be making it 'official' but for the moment I'd like you to pick over it and point out anything stupid or illogical about it.
Chandra Scale After Dr Akuti Chandra
An aggregate measurement of an individual’s invulnerability based on various potentially lethal factors. Most ‘invulnerable individuals’ are never completely invulnerable. Often several factors can be fatal at low yields even though the individual ranks highly in other areas.
Categories
Each ranking is looking at an overall effect within that category. For example:
if an individual can withstand certain toxins in high quantities but they are susceptible to small doses of other toxins then they will score a lower ranking;
susceptibility to certain forms of radiation whilst still able to withstand certain other radiological types will result in a lower ranking.
Concussive Force: the extent to which an individual can withstand the impact of blunt physical objects or shockwave from explosions.
Radiation: can the individual withstand radiation from the entire electr-omagnetic spectrum? When does cellular damage occur? This includes concentrated and focused radiological forces (eg. lasers). Are any ill-effects immediate or likely to be long term?
Thermal Extremes: what temperature will result in damage to the subject. This ranks from 0K (Absolute zero) to 10,000,000K (nuclear explosion). Some may be susceptible to cold but not heat and vice versa. A low tolerance in either extreme will effect overall rating within this scale.
Environmental Pressure: can the individual withstand high pressure (water/air); can the individual survive in a vacuum (eg flying through space)? This is rated from tonnes per square cm (for liquid and solid pressures) to kilopascals (atmosphere).
Toxins: can the individual tolerate poisonous substances? This category covers gases (including atmospheres, eg. of other planets), liquids (including acids, alien secretions) and solids (where ingestion or contact with the skin may be fatal).
Cutting: what is the sharpness of an object before it can cut or pierce the skin? What force is required before that object will cut or pierce the skin. This is useful in assessing risk from gunfire, swords, blades, etc. Measurement takes into account the hardness of the material the object is composed of, the sharpness of its edge or point, and the force at which it impacts.
Electrical shock: what voltage and amperage can an individual withstand? Upper testing range is 10 billion volts/300,000 amps.
Ranking
Each category ranks from 1-10 where 1 is the normal human tolerance to lethal events and 10 is the maximum for a testable range. Rankings of 10 are rare and although they may indicate complete invulnerability within that category it is likely that there is still an upper limit to the individuals tolerance. Also, while they may be invulnerable to certain factors within a certain extreme event (eg an explosion) other aspects of that event may still prove fatal (eg – able to withstand the concussive force of an explosion but not the heat or poisonous gases that might be discharged).
Where an individual is untested in a particular variable they should be ranked as 0 as this indicates caution should be exercised when engaging in combat (to reduce risk of using fatal force or, conversely, complacency about their actual level of tolerance, which may be extremely high).
Variables
All rankings within the scale have a +/-1 variable.
It is difficult to fully gauge invulnerability, as extreme testing would result in the death of the subject. At best testing, can only be made to a point where mild discomfort, pain or damage/injury occurs (preferably to DNA and/or cell samples – although this is impossible where invulnerability prevents the collection of such samples). The scale can be further refined only through real-life experiences, although the difficulty in verifying anecdotal reports of the subject’s interaction with their environment should not be understated and can lead to unreliable rankings.
Scale
The aggregate ranks are given as the Chandra Scale, and are 1-10 for each category.
Examples:
Epoch
Chandra Scale: [cf]9.5-[r]8-[te]7.5-[ep]9.9-[t]10-[c]9-[es]7
the scales above aren't official just yet... i'm already thinking i need to adjust a couple for Charisma and Epsoch... however... Bill will outrank Charisma in most but not all catagories. Woms is definitely in the lower end of the range for most, except concussive force - for example he has a ranking of 1 for toxins, radiation - probably about 2 for temperature extremes - 5 for concussive force, which explains how he survived having a cement truck dropped on him but still ended up somewhat broken.
i'm thinking that the way the scale increases (at least for most catagories) won't be incremental but sliding (eg temp extremes for 1=>80oC (or Kelvin eqivalent); 2=80-200oC; 3=200-1,000oC; 4=1,000-10,000oC; 5=10,000-100,000oC etc up to to 10=<10,000,000oC ) i need to think about that a bit more!
i'm probably opening up a whole can of worms by having a scale, especially an official one that is still remarkably vague. it should help offer a bit of a guide though.
when i run Bill's classified tomorrow it will include his Chandra Scale ratings - it'll only be included for those who have a degree of invulnerabilty _________________ Magellan - superhero cadets... their own worst enemy is themselves!
Posted: Mon Oct 09, 2006 3:56 am Post subject: Re: Chandra Scale (beta!!)
Hi.
I'm not sure I understand the purpose of this scale. Since you named it after a doctor, I'm assuming that it is a fast summary of an individuals vulnerability/resistance, for doctors and/or commanders (leaders of tactical teams).
In that case, I think that there are some changes necessary, in order to assist medical treatment (what I'd like to know as a doctor), and command.
The changes are broadly:
1)Add an option for negative resistance (vulnerability greater than human) - for example, Bugle is very white and pale, therefore his resistance to sunlight should be something like -1 or -2.
2)Expand the scale - there are some categories which are too broad, and include factors which work in different (and sometimes contradictory manner).
As for expanding the scale - I'll go over what I think should be expanded, and I'll try to give examples from SuperHeros I remember. I might get some of their properties wrong, but try to ignore that, please.
xmung wrote:
Radiation: can the individual withstand radiation from the entire electr-omagnetic spectrum? When does cellular damage occur? This includes concentrated and focused radiological forces (eg. lasers). Are any ill-effects immediate or likely to be long term?
Not all radiations act in an identical manner. For example, visible light lasers act mostly as a source of heat. It seems that someone who's resistant to heat should be resistant to them, although not for X-rays.
xmung wrote:
Thermal Extremes: what temperature will result in damage to the subject. This ranks from 0K (Absolute zero) to 10,000,000K (nuclear explosion). Some may be susceptible to cold but not heat and vice versa. A low tolerance in either extreme will effect overall rating within this scale.
I'd split this to Heat, Cold, and maybe Transition as well.
For example - Johnny Storm would probably get a 5 or so on this scale. However, his resistance to Cold is 1 or -1, while his resistance to Heat is probably higher. Let's say I get him unconscious after going into a fire - he's probably asleep. If he's unconscious after going to a deep freezer, he might be dying (despite the fact that someone at 5 shouldn't have problems with that).
Transition - you might have someone who can survive extremely high temperature, and extremely low temperature, but not rapid changes.
xmung wrote:
Environmental Pressure: can the individual withstand high pressure (water/air); can the individual survive in a vacuum (eg flying through space)? This is rated from tonnes per square cm (for liquid and solid pressures) to kilopascals (atmosphere).
I'd split this into Vacum and Pressure. You might have a creature which grew up at the bottom of the sea. Her resistance to pressure should be very high, but her ability to withstand vaccum will be much lower than a human. In fact, 1 Atmosphere might be terminal vaccum for her.
Concussive (as you've described it) might be variable pressure.
xmung wrote:
Toxins: can the individual tolerate poisonous substances? This category covers gases (including atmospheres, eg. of other planets), liquids (including acids, alien secretions) and solids (where ingestion or contact with the skin may be fatal).
You might want to split this into Corrosive (chemical) and BioToxins (Biological), since they don't act in exactly the same manner. Someone like TinMan (X-3) would be very resistant to Corrosive, but not BioToxin, while someone like Wolverine might be totally resistant to BioToxin (I think). Chiq might be resistant to corrosive and bioToxin (if I understood his background correctly).
As for cutting - Doctors differentiate between stabbing and laceration. They can both be factored into the same scale, or in two different scales. Again TinMan might have different values for the two actions, which could result in a medium value for the scale. I'm not sure that you need two scales.
That's about it. I like the thought of having a scale, although it is probably very rule of thumb.
You might just have more than one value for each scale, for example:
Johnny Storm, Temp 6/-2/4 (that is heat 6, cold -2, transition 1) Tox 1/1 Pressure 1/1/1
In case of a deep sea creature Pressure would be 8/-3/1 (or something like that, for Pressure, Vaccum, Transition)
Posted: Mon Oct 09, 2006 7:28 am Post subject: Re: Chandra Scale (beta!!)
uridavid wrote:
(first registered post, and I'm complaining)
not at all.
welcome and many thanks for your thoughts and comments.
pretty much everything you've mentioned was on my mind at the time I started putting together this scale. I guess I was trying to compact it as much as possible just to give a simple overview, so that someone (mostly the reader) could tell "ok that invulnerable character can withstand this but not that". I was also trying to figure out how one might have degrees of invulnerabilty, since some are moreso than others and a scale was a good way to differentiate for anyone wanting to compare.
I named the scale after Dr Chandra with the thinking that it was her who devised it - moreso than anyone else she's in a good position to see where certain traumas has caused injury or been fatal and has been able to callibrate it on other individuals. I guess it would aid her in advising what people should avoid where possible.
At any rate I do like the idea of the negative rating and the split rating, although that might make it more complex. Possibly that degree of mesurement sits on the level below the basic score to give more dimension to it...
something to think about. thanks again! _________________ Magellan - superhero cadets... their own worst enemy is themselves!
i'm thinking that the way the scale increases (at least for most catagories) won't be incremental but sliding (eg temp extremes for 1=>80oC (or Kelvin eqivalent); 2=80-200oC; 3=200-1,000oC; 4=1,000-10,000oC; 5=10,000-100,000oC etc up to to 10=<10,000,000oC ) i need to think about that a bit more!
It sounds like you want a logarithmic scale (like decibels, or the Richter scale, or stellar magnitudes, etc.).
My deepest apologies. That was going to be my way of suggesting logarithmic scales, but even that excuse is gone now. _________________ "I for one do not lament the passing of social organizations that used the many as a manured soil in which to grow a few graceful flowers of refined culture." -- Theodosius Dobzhansky
here's an email from a reader with some good thoughts about the matter:
Pascal wrote:
This is, I confess, directly inspired by the Superman classic comics. But considering the current time-travelling plotting duo present at Magellan, I'm surprised you haven't yet considered two special types of (in)vulverability, just as important in specificity as toxins or infectious agents. Namely, magic and psychic/mind attacks. A synthesis of those two could be, for instance : "how resistant would Epoch be against the Vrax-Japh?" Or "could the fake Karma delude Charisma as easily as Tom Bass, and would Freya then fight back as efficiently with her vybe power?"
While I'm at it, why not push my luck. Gravitation/acceleration. There haven't been any scenes on Jupiter yet, but is Bill Banks more resilient to blacking out in a tight-looping military jet, or simply an extreme acceleration while flying? It involves resistance of the inner body and its physiology, which may greatly vary. Just like they do with real-life norms.
Sensory acceleration : is it harder to make Charisma dizzy by fast rotation? Let's say, to make the answer simple, that it depends upon both sensory and "inertial" stoutness.
Oh, and of course, mental vulnerability includes the ability not to freak out when facing a hideous-looking unknown foe. Fear.
I'm not sure where you would classify resistance to asphyxia. Toxic gases are one thing, but what about lack of oxygen in an air-tight vault, or -opposedly- in the vacuum of space? Epoch seems to be comfortable in orbit... Does he hold his breath?
And the pressure resistance of the lungs to blast effect, high-pressure atmosphere, etc...
I understand the complexity of the matter is virtually limitless. Not to mention the eventual classification of super-powers! You just see what this all inspires you. >From what I've seen so far, you can't go wrong. Your universes are very carefully designed, and this is a very commendable quality. How many times does a character die in a scripted RPG, because suddenly the teammates are so dumb they don't think of using a stupid healing potion? (I loved it when, in Shining Force Neo on PS2, a level-100 character is mortally wounded because his foe's blade was cursed, and its wounds don't heal. At long last, a half-plausible RPG scenario!)
I noticed that Charisma is more immune to toxins than daddy Epoch...
Thanks for your thoughts on this somewhat complex issue. I must agree that there are many many variations and the scale is no where near as detailed as it could be. i decided to leave magic out of it since it is not a physical attribute and most people are likely to be vulnerable to it unless they have magical skills.
The various categories are intentionally broad - most of what you mention should be able to fit in there somewhere if it is going to be capable of harming them physically... so psychological and emotional harm is out. chances are some of the issues you raise might black them out or disorient them or dazzle them but again hasn't injured them. karmaya probably could effect charisma since her power works on a telepathic level, which charisma has little defence against, but that is a matter of training and again, not physical.
my thoughts about space are that Epoch holds his breath and can do so for extended periods of time but not indefinitely and would benefit from a breathing apparatus for lengthy space journeying - the reason he and his lungs don't explode are more to do with his ability to withstand pressures both low and high. _________________ Magellan - superhero cadets... their own worst enemy is themselves!
In "radiation" you only listed lasers. Interestingly, many types of lasers only serve to increase the temperature (locally) and are thus "thermal extremes". EMR is made up only of photons and are only in risk of DNA damage with higher frequency/lower wavelength waves. (because only the have the energy needed to directly alter molecular bonds, the rest just get converted into heat; which can alter molecular bonds but requires a whole lot of it)
Another issue is nuclear radiation which you did not list and is a completely different thing. Of which there is alpha, beta, and gamma rays which are all completely different (gamma rays is actually EMR; alpha rays is protons/nutrons and are harmless, they cannot even penetrate a sheet of paper much less skin, and beta rays are electrons/positrons).
I agree with the suggestion of splitting pressure and vacuum, but there isn't a need to overly fret about all this (the radiation too) because as you already said, the result is an aggregate of different tests. You can be highly resistant to some forms of radiation while weak to others, or resistant to pressure and not vacuum, and it will show up as a lower score.
Overall you have done a pretty good job of classifying damage and forces _________________ I do not have a superman complex; for I am God, not superman!
Many thanks for your feedback - there are no doubt quite a number of holes in the overall scale that need fixing. And it certainly is long overdue a fix - I'll take your suggestions into account when I look at upgrading this from a beta to fully fledged... _________________ Magellan - superhero cadets... their own worst enemy is themselves!
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
not at all.
(i gotta admit, i laughed!)
