Board index » SDC Worlds » Nightbane®

 


Post new topic Reply to topic
Author Message
 Post subject: Resistance Strategy
Unread postPosted: Sun Mar 31, 2019 6:01 pm
  

D-Bee

Joined: Wed Mar 20, 2019 10:30 am
Posts: 3
I've been thinking about running a Resistance-centered Nightbane game, which led me to thinking about how the Resistance most likely operates. What are there priorities? Tactics? Grand strategy? I've got a few ideas of my own, but I'm primarily interested in what YOU think.

First, I think in most urban areas, both Earth and the Nightlands, they'd use the same cell structure as most modern day terrorist groups and guerrilla fighters, so that the capture of one cell wouldn't immediately compromise the entire local organization. Shows like Travelers and Sleeper Cell give a pretty good idea what that would look like.

As for common operations, I initially imagined them copycating the insurgencies in Iraq and Afghanistan, but realized that probably wouldn't be terribly effective. Setting IEDs to blow up Hound patrols Doom's Harbor or Typhoon probably wouldn't be an effective tactic: while the Nightlords have a finite number of Hounds, they have an awful lot, and they don't care about "casualties" the same way a human army would: Even if Hounds get bummed out or frightened by the death of their fellows, I doubt it really impacts their performance much, and I'm quite certain the Nightlords themselves don't give a ****. Unless the Resistance finds an opportunity to take out a whole lot of them at minimal risk to themselves (like planting a huge bomb in whatever the Hound equivalent to a barracks is), they probably just avoid them.

Common operations: I imagine their priority is acquiring intelligence and taking out High Value Targets, basically anything Hound Master and above. Intel gather would probably fall into two categories: mundane (how many Hounds and other resources does a given Nightlord have, where are they, what is he doing with them, what are his/her goals and objectives, etc) and occult (magic/supernatural information that can be used against them, like artifacts, spells, and other spooky secrets).

Grand Strategy: As far as an endgame, I imagine the Resistance will be relying on the Nightlords to help destroy themselves. If they can take out a few key leaders, like Moloch and Magog, they can probably spark Nightlord civil war. Once that happens, the plan is to play the remaining Nightlords off against one another, until they're collectively weak enough that the Resistance can take on what's left directly.

One of the Resistance's greatest advantages, they believe, is the that the Nightlords, for all their great intelligence and power, still have a fundamentally Bronze Age view of warfare and politics. They organize themselves along the lines of city-state feudalism. Finance, telecominications, the globalized economy, all largely bewilder them. They're accustomed be the absolute lord of their own domains, but decisions Magog makes in Chicago can have profound and immediate effects in Moloch's New York and vice versa. This gives the Resistance opportunities to turn them against one another.


          Top  
 
 Post subject: Re: Resistance Strategy
Unread postPosted: Mon Apr 01, 2019 1:51 pm
  

User avatar
Monk

Joined: Sun Oct 19, 2003 7:22 pm
Posts: 15389
Location: 2nd Degree Black Belt of Post Fu
Comment: The Munchkin Fairy
The first thing the Rulebook says about the Resistance is that they use sabatoge, espionage and guerrilla tactics, and that many "Terrorist" actions in the Nightbane world are the Resistance, so I'd say you pretty much hit the nail on the head.

_________________
Sometimes, you're like a beacon of light in the darkness, giving me some hope for humankind. ~ Killer Cyborg

You can have something done good, fast and cheap. If you want it done good and fast, it's not going to be cheap. If you want it done fast and cheap it won't be good. If you want something done good and cheap it won't be done fast. ~ Dark Brandon


          Top  
 
 Post subject: Re: Resistance Strategy
Unread postPosted: Tue Apr 09, 2019 11:04 pm
  

User avatar
Knight

Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 2:01 am
Posts: 3708
Location: Nashville.....ish....
I definitely see the Resistance as following "terrorist" type lines. A better way to see it might be like the French Resistance/Maquis or similar WW2 groups. The difference between a freedom fighter and a terrorist can be very fine.

_________________
RockJock, holder of the mighty Rune Rock Hammer!


          Top  
 
 Post subject: Re: Resistance Strategy
Unread postPosted: Thu Apr 11, 2019 11:33 am
  

User avatar
Monk

Joined: Sun Oct 19, 2003 7:22 pm
Posts: 15389
Location: 2nd Degree Black Belt of Post Fu
Comment: The Munchkin Fairy
RockJock wrote:
I definitely see the Resistance as following "terrorist" type lines. A better way to see it might be like the French Resistance/Maquis or similar WW2 groups. The difference between a freedom fighter and a terrorist can be very fine.


It's mostly a matter of target selection. Freedom Fighters target military/government targets and try to minimize civilian casualties.

Still, it doesn't always go as planned. the Fiction bit for the Guilt-Eaters shows Resistance-Leader burger face suffering reoccuring nightmares about a car bomb he'd set for one of Molochs avatars acidentally blowing up a bus full of innocent tourists instead. No one bats a thousand and it only takes one slip up for the world to potentially turn on you.

_________________
Sometimes, you're like a beacon of light in the darkness, giving me some hope for humankind. ~ Killer Cyborg

You can have something done good, fast and cheap. If you want it done good and fast, it's not going to be cheap. If you want it done fast and cheap it won't be good. If you want something done good and cheap it won't be done fast. ~ Dark Brandon


          Top  
 
 Post subject: Re: Resistance Strategy
Unread postPosted: Thu Apr 11, 2019 5:32 pm
  

User avatar
Megaversal® Ambassador

Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2011 1:23 am
Posts: 1592
Location: Houston, TX
Comment: "I will not be silenced. I will not submit. I will find the truth and shout it to the world. "
Nekira Sudacne wrote:
RockJock wrote:
I definitely see the Resistance as following "terrorist" type lines. A better way to see it might be like the French Resistance/Maquis or similar WW2 groups. The difference between a freedom fighter and a terrorist can be very fine.


It's mostly a matter of target selection. Freedom Fighters target military/government targets and try to minimize civilian casualties.

Still, it doesn't always go as planned. the Fiction bit for the Guilt-Eaters shows Resistance-Leader burger face suffering reoccuring nightmares about a car bomb he'd set for one of Molochs avatars acidentally blowing up a bus full of innocent tourists instead. No one bats a thousand and it only takes one slip up for the world to potentially turn on you.

It's also important to remember that target selection is not always clear cut in warfare regardless if it is conventional or an insurgency.

The factories that are producing the poisons that the Nightlords are putting in the food might be perfectly legitimate military targets but most of the people you kill will be civilians. The same with a military checkpoint, it is hard to argue that a checkpoint run by uniformed military is somehow not legitimate target but most of the people that die in an attack like that will be innocent civilians.

This conflict can be a great source of drama as your resistance cell may have to stop a rogue cell from taking an action that goes too far. Good examples of this are inSeason 4 of Babylon 5 (The Mars Resistance) and the last season of Star Wars Rebels (the Rebel Alliance vs. the Partisans).

_________________
Northern Gun Chief of Robotics
Designer of NG-X40 Storm Hammer Power Armor & NG-HC1000 Dragonfly Hover Chopper
Big game hunter, explorer extra ordinaire and expert on the Aegis Buffalo
Ultimate Insider - WB 32: Lemuria
Ultimate Insider - WB 33: Northern Gun 1
Ultimate Insider - WB 34: Northern Gun 2
Showdown Backer - Robotech RPG Tactics
Benefactor Insider - Rifts Bestiary: Volume 1


          Top  
 
 Post subject: Re: Resistance Strategy
Unread postPosted: Wed Apr 24, 2019 10:39 pm
  

User avatar
Knight

Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 2:01 am
Posts: 3708
Location: Nashville.....ish....
Killing a senator with a bomb makes you a terrorist. The fact that the died 2 years ago, and was replaced with a Doppleganger is not going to be known to the general public, possibly not even to a faction in another city.

_________________
RockJock, holder of the mighty Rune Rock Hammer!


          Top  
 
 Post subject: Re: Resistance Strategy
Unread postPosted: Thu Apr 25, 2019 12:38 am
  

User avatar
Palladin

Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 9:40 pm
Posts: 9481
Comment: Palladium Books Canon is set solely by Kevin Siembieda, either in person, or by his approval of published material.
RockJock wrote:
Killing a senator with a bomb makes you a terrorist. The fact that the died 2 years ago, and was replaced with a Doppleganger is not going to be known to the general public, possibly not even to a faction in another city.

It depends honestly.
If you just get the Senator? That's a senior government official and a perfectly legitimate target. A car bomb on their car that blows up just them is a viable strategy that can, and has been, used by formal governments in open and covert wars with some people caught doing such things actually getting treated as POWs and not spies or terrorists.

If you kill the Senator, his personal secretary, five clerks, two interns, three police, his body guard, four constituents and the UPS man with a bomb in the package you sent him?
then yeah, 100% terrorist.

The fine line is often target selection, and target discrimination. If you can keep your targets limited to clearly 'legitimate targets' and keep collateral damage and death to the absolute minimum it is much easier to present yourself as a rebel faction and not simply a terrorist group.

It is also a PR issue. It is harder for people to get worked up about a group that doesn't threaten them. If Joe Citizen is worried that "they" (who ever "they" are) is going to blow him up next then he is going to endorse all sorts of draconian measures to catch 'them'. If Joe Citizen knows that the only people that 'they' go after are real big-wig politicos and military leaders and stuff... he's going to be more of "thats pretty horrible, but I'm more interested in you fixing the roads"

_________________
The rules are not a bludgeon with which to hammer a character into a game. They are a guide to how a group of friends can get together to weave a collective story that entertains everyone involved. We forget that at our peril.

Edmund Burke wrote:
The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."


          Top  
 
 Post subject: Re: Resistance Strategy
Unread postPosted: Thu Apr 25, 2019 1:04 am
  

User avatar
Megaversal® Ambassador

Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2011 1:23 am
Posts: 1592
Location: Houston, TX
Comment: "I will not be silenced. I will not submit. I will find the truth and shout it to the world. "
eliakon wrote:
RockJock wrote:
Killing a senator with a bomb makes you a terrorist. The fact that the died 2 years ago, and was replaced with a Doppleganger is not going to be known to the general public, possibly not even to a faction in another city.

It is also a PR issue. It is harder for people to get worked up about a group that doesn't threaten them. If Joe Citizen is worried that "they" (who ever "they" are) is going to blow him up next then he is going to endorse all sorts of draconian measures to catch 'them'. If Joe Citizen knows that the only people that 'they' go after are real big-wig politicos and military leaders and stuff... he's going to be more of "thats pretty horrible, but I'm more interested in you fixing the roads"

I am pretty sure all he was getting at is the PR issue. Violence in public is always going to make people vulnerable and scared and as we just saw in Ireland last week it doesn't matter the target you choose, just the ones you hit.

_________________
Northern Gun Chief of Robotics
Designer of NG-X40 Storm Hammer Power Armor & NG-HC1000 Dragonfly Hover Chopper
Big game hunter, explorer extra ordinaire and expert on the Aegis Buffalo
Ultimate Insider - WB 32: Lemuria
Ultimate Insider - WB 33: Northern Gun 1
Ultimate Insider - WB 34: Northern Gun 2
Showdown Backer - Robotech RPG Tactics
Benefactor Insider - Rifts Bestiary: Volume 1


          Top  
 
 Post subject: Re: Resistance Strategy
Unread postPosted: Thu Apr 25, 2019 8:44 pm
  

User avatar
Palladin

Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 9:40 pm
Posts: 9481
Comment: Palladium Books Canon is set solely by Kevin Siembieda, either in person, or by his approval of published material.
Warshield73 wrote:
eliakon wrote:
RockJock wrote:
Killing a senator with a bomb makes you a terrorist. The fact that the died 2 years ago, and was replaced with a Doppleganger is not going to be known to the general public, possibly not even to a faction in another city.

It is also a PR issue. It is harder for people to get worked up about a group that doesn't threaten them. If Joe Citizen is worried that "they" (who ever "they" are) is going to blow him up next then he is going to endorse all sorts of draconian measures to catch 'them'. If Joe Citizen knows that the only people that 'they' go after are real big-wig politicos and military leaders and stuff... he's going to be more of "thats pretty horrible, but I'm more interested in you fixing the roads"

I am pretty sure all he was getting at is the PR issue. Violence in public is always going to make people vulnerable and scared and as we just saw in Ireland last week it doesn't matter the target you choose, just the ones you hit.

I am not sure I see your point?
Shooting a journalist is exactly the sort of thing that I was talking about in the part of my quote you snipped out :?
So what are you trying to say here? Because you just said the exact same thing I did, but some how as a rebuttal to me saying that? Only after removing me saying myself :?

No one considers journalists to be 'legitimate targets of war'. Just like no one considers civilians to be legitimate targets, or bystanders, or hospitals, or busses or schools.
Government leaders are legitimate targets if you target just the leaders. And 'target' means more than just 'select as who we will attack' it includes the way that you go about attacking them as well.

Especially since we can most certainly see that violence in public doesn't do anything unless it is personal.
Violent crime in the US doesn't really motivate much if any response in most citizens because it doesn't seem to affect them. The vast majority of US citizens figure that its Not Their Problem and so they just Don't Care.
The same is true of a resistance. As long as you make the violence "not my problem" then you are still golden.

_________________
The rules are not a bludgeon with which to hammer a character into a game. They are a guide to how a group of friends can get together to weave a collective story that entertains everyone involved. We forget that at our peril.

Edmund Burke wrote:
The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."


          Top  
 
 Post subject: Re: Resistance Strategy
Unread postPosted: Thu Apr 25, 2019 10:48 pm
  

Palladin

Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 4:11 pm
Posts: 7137
eh, i wouldn't say nobody considers even regular civilians to not be legitimate targets. i mean, pay it lip service, absolutely, but when it really comes down to it, i'm pretty sure the civilians in berlin during world war 2 were not spending a lot of time thinking how lucky they were that the allies weren't bombing their homes, mostly because the allies *were* bombing their homes. with incendiaries. likewise, i'm quite certain people in london weren't wasting too much time being grateful that the germans weren't bombing their homes, because the germans *were* bombing their homes. frankly, the germans didn't even make a *pretense* of not targeting civilians when they invaded russia, and while i don't hear as many stories about the russians invading germany, i suspect a lot of that has to do with the fact that the russians were not invading germany for very long before they had conquered it (i *can* tell you that i've heard the civilians were desperately hopeful that someone else would conquer them before russia could, but none of the western allies were excited about getting their own soldiers killed just so that they could hand the land over to russia so they all stopped right where the agreed-upon border would be). i can also definitely tell you that the large nuclear arsenals built up during the cold war were not exactly going to limit civilian casualties. going back a little further, i rather doubt the civilians of the south felt particularly "not targeted" when sherman marched through their lands, took all their livestock, destroyed their railroad lines, burned large numbers of buildings to the ground (he didn't burn them with people inside it, but again, i'm not convinced they felt very "not targeted"), and moved on to find the next place to raze.

i can also tell you that these are far from the only times this sort of thing happened. oh, plenty of nations throughout history would agree that it was immoral to just show up and slaughter civilians (or steal all their food and leave them to die of starvation and disease)... you know, when the other guys did it to them, anyways. strangely enough, they often had this truly remarkable blind spot about the immorality of it all when they were doing it to other people.


          Top  
 
 Post subject: Re: Resistance Strategy
Unread postPosted: Fri Apr 26, 2019 2:02 am
  

User avatar
Palladin

Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 9:40 pm
Posts: 9481
Comment: Palladium Books Canon is set solely by Kevin Siembieda, either in person, or by his approval of published material.
Shark_Force wrote:
eh, i wouldn't say nobody considers even regular civilians to not be legitimate targets. i mean, pay it lip service, absolutely, but when it really comes down to it, i'm pretty sure the civilians in berlin during world war 2 were not spending a lot of time thinking how lucky they were that the allies weren't bombing their homes, mostly because the allies *were* bombing their homes. with incendiaries. likewise, i'm quite certain people in london weren't wasting too much time being grateful that the germans weren't bombing their homes, because the germans *were* bombing their homes. frankly, the germans didn't even make a *pretense* of not targeting civilians when they invaded russia, and while i don't hear as many stories about the russians invading germany, i suspect a lot of that has to do with the fact that the russians were not invading germany for very long before they had conquered it (i *can* tell you that i've heard the civilians were desperately hopeful that someone else would conquer them before russia could, but none of the western allies were excited about getting their own soldiers killed just so that they could hand the land over to russia so they all stopped right where the agreed-upon border would be). i can also definitely tell you that the large nuclear arsenals built up during the cold war were not exactly going to limit civilian casualties. going back a little further, i rather doubt the civilians of the south felt particularly "not targeted" when sherman marched through their lands, took all their livestock, destroyed their railroad lines, burned large numbers of buildings to the ground (he didn't burn them with people inside it, but again, i'm not convinced they felt very "not targeted"), and moved on to find the next place to raze.i can also tell you that these are far from the only times this sort of thing happened. oh, plenty of nations throughout history would agree that it was immoral to just show up and slaughter civilians (or steal all their food and leave them to die of starvation and disease)... you know, when the other guys did it to them, anyways. strangely enough, they often had this truly remarkable blind spot about the immorality of it all when they were doing it to other people.

The Allied bombing in WWII is hardly a good example.
Considering that it is pretty solidly considered a text book example of the Allies overlooking War Crimes by their own side today.

So citing examples of actual war crimes as what legitimate war looks like...
nope, not very helpful.

Nor is trying to argue that "just because there is a hypocritical element to militaries to overlook their own crimes" that those crimes somehow don't really exist? (I think? It's sort of hard to understand your point about the fact that Victors Justice only applies to the loser and no winning force ever brings charges against its own)

Not to mention that you are conflating "targeting civilians" with "collateral civilian casualties". And what constitutes legitimate collateral civilian casualties is often settled afterword's in courts.

AND you are also trying to conflate "Open declared war between nations" with "insurgencies and resistance movements within a nation itself" as if they should be treated identically
Again Not Helpful


Not to mention that everything you are saying is exactly what I was saying.
Like literally exactly what I was saying?
Seriously what part of "when you target the civilians they feel targeted and support measures to stop you" don't you understand?
It is almost as if the civilians in WWII were supportive of their governments fighting to end the war.
It is almost as if the civilians in the 1950s felt personally threatened by nuclear weapons held by their nations enemies and supported measures to combat that
Almost exactly like that in fact :lol:

_________________
The rules are not a bludgeon with which to hammer a character into a game. They are a guide to how a group of friends can get together to weave a collective story that entertains everyone involved. We forget that at our peril.

Edmund Burke wrote:
The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."


          Top  
 
 Post subject: Re: Resistance Strategy
Unread postPosted: Fri Apr 26, 2019 5:25 am
  

Palladin

Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 4:11 pm
Posts: 7137
how is the bombing in WWII *not* a good example of people considering civilians legitimate targets?

it isn't like this was some top secret thing done by a tiny handful of rogue operators hiding in the shadows. it was


          Top  
 
 Post subject: Re: Resistance Strategy
Unread postPosted: Fri Apr 26, 2019 8:29 pm
  

User avatar
Palladin

Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 9:40 pm
Posts: 9481
Comment: Palladium Books Canon is set solely by Kevin Siembieda, either in person, or by his approval of published material.
Shark_Force wrote:
how is the bombing in WWII *not* a good example of people considering civilians legitimate targets?

Because it was a war crime?
Just because we didn't charge our people for it doesn't make it justified.

Every legal scholor today (and most back then) are pretty unanimous that it was 100% a war crime and that Allied Bomber Command should have been put on trial for Crimes Against Humanity.
But, as is the usual case, the winners refuse to charge themselves.

_________________
The rules are not a bludgeon with which to hammer a character into a game. They are a guide to how a group of friends can get together to weave a collective story that entertains everyone involved. We forget that at our peril.

Edmund Burke wrote:
The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."


          Top  
 
 Post subject: Re: Resistance Strategy
Unread postPosted: Sat Apr 27, 2019 4:02 am
  

Palladin

Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 4:11 pm
Posts: 7137
eliakon wrote:
Shark_Force wrote:
how is the bombing in WWII *not* a good example of people considering civilians legitimate targets?

Because it was a war crime?
Just because we didn't charge our people for it doesn't make it justified.

Every legal scholor today (and most back then) are pretty unanimous that it was 100% a war crime and that Allied Bomber Command should have been put on trial for Crimes Against Humanity.
But, as is the usual case, the winners refuse to charge themselves.


i'm confused as to why you think the theoretical legal status is of such great importance.

if the people in charge refused to prosecute the crime which they know exists and had plenty of evidence to conduct a trial, then they are condoning it.

as such, it still represents a situation where civilians were considered to be legitimate targets. if the people in charge did not consider civilians to be legitimate targets, *something* would have been done about it. instead, they ignored it completely. the fact that other people who were never in any position of authority to designate who is or is not a legitimate target would consider them to be anything other than legitimate targets is irrelevant.


          Top  
 
 
Post new topic Reply to topic



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Axelmania


Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Jump to:  

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 post attachments in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group