Poll: Particle Beams (Physics-based House Rule)

[Killer Cyborg]

This topic spun of something somebody mentioned in a thread around here a few weeks ago, and from my ongoing interest in physics and engineering. Prepare for some nerdy nitpicking.

Particle Beams aren't really "energy" blasts.

Subatomic particles such as electrons, positrons, and protons can be accelerated to high velocities and energies, usually expressed in terms of center-of-mass energy, by machines that impart energy to the particles in small stages or nudges, ultimately achieving very high energy particle beams, measured in terms of billions and even trillions of electron volts. Thus, in terms of their scale, particles can be made to perform as powerful missiles for bombarding other particles in a target substance or for colliding with each other as they assume intersecting orbits.

IE, a particle beam really uses "energy" to accelerate matter in a way very similar to a Rail Gun. Except instead of metal slugs or rings, the gun shoots sub-atomic particles.

The article continues to state the following:

The general idea of particle-beam weaponry is to hit a target object with a stream of accelerated particles moving at near the speed of light and therefore carrying tremendous kinetic energy; the particles transfer their kinetic energy to the atoms in the molecules of the target upon striking, much as a cue ball transfers its energy to the racked balls in billiards, thus exciting the target's atoms and superheating the target object in a short time, leading to explosion either of the surface layer or the interior of the target.

Therefore, I'm considering a house rule that Particle Beams inflict half kinetic damage, and half energy damage (heat/plasma).

I feel this gives P-Beam weapons an interesting niche in Rifts. Lighter and more portable than most rail-guns, Particle Beams tend to have shorter range but still pack a solid "punch". They're fairly expensive, eat energy clips, and tend to be relegated to the heavy rifles and PA/Robot/Vehicle weaponry (with the exception of the 2-3 P-Beam pistols) or other applications where they can be powered by a nuclear battery.

For groups like Triax and the Coalition, (and GMs with unruly PCs), it would have applications as a counter to spells like Invulnerability and Impervious to Energy. Still wouldn't do bubkis against Vampires, Werewolves, etc, but I feel the house rule makes P-Beams a much more viable and useful option for both PCs and NPCs.

"What say you?"

I say it sounds a lot like how lasers work.

[Ziggurat the Eternal]

I say it sounds a lot like how lasers work.

And Ion weapons.

I think it sounds pretty.....sound.
Go with it. I still use it as an energy weapon.

[DhAkael]

Lasers emit light waves. Electromagnetic radiation. Energy. They're not emitting matter, they're emitting energy that can affect matter. If I understand correctly, it does damage by transferring energy to the electrons of nearby matter, causing molecular bonds to break down. This generates a thermal "cutting" effect.

Whereas a particle blasts (and yes, Ion beams, which are a type of particle beams) literally use particles/ions as "bullets". They emit matter, not energy.

Oh jeez..now we're getting into the funkniess of photons; Wave or particle? The answer is "yes", dependant on how they are created and manipulated.
Isn't Quantum physicis PHUN?!

P.S.; poll answer was "preeeeeeetttty lights..." *drool*
Though my opinion, who cares?! If you want to house rule PB's as half kinetic, go for it. You are the GM, the final call is yours NOT anyone elses (except maybe that physics lauriette from M.I.T. who may be in your gaming group as rules lawyer ).

[Killer Cyborg]

Lasers emit light waves. Electromagnetic radiation. Energy. They're not emitting matter, they're emitting energy that can affect matter. If I understand correctly, it does damage by transferring energy to the electrons of nearby matter, causing molecular bonds to break down. This generates a thermal "cutting" effect.

Whereas a particle blasts (and yes, Ion beams, which are a type of particle beams) literally use particles/ions as "bullets". They emit matter, not energy.

What do you think that light IS?
It's photons.
Particles.

[Dr. Doom III]

Lasers emit light waves. Electromagnetic radiation. Energy. They're not emitting matter, they're emitting energy that can affect matter. If I understand correctly, it does damage by transferring energy to the electrons of nearby matter, causing molecular bonds to break down. This generates a thermal "cutting" effect.

Whereas a particle blasts (and yes, Ion beams, which are a type of particle beams) literally use particles/ions as "bullets". They emit matter, not energy.

What do you think that light IS?
It's photons.
Particles.

But light is also a wave.

[Qev]

Lasers emit light waves. Electromagnetic radiation. Energy. They're not emitting matter, they're emitting energy that can affect matter. If I understand correctly, it does damage by transferring energy to the electrons of nearby matter, causing molecular bonds to break down. This generates a thermal "cutting" effect.

Whereas a particle blasts (and yes, Ion beams, which are a type of particle beams) literally use particles/ions as "bullets". They emit matter, not energy.

What do you think that light IS?
It's photons.
Particles.

But light is also a wave.

So are all particles. And in the end, they both end up dumping heat into their targets.

But yeah, the interaction of lasers with matter does differ from that of particle beams. Lasers (below the x-ray wavelengths, where things become horrible) tend to heat the surface of their target, where particle beams tend to be much more penetrating. If anything I'd give particle beam weapons a sort of 'armor piercing' effect, whatever the rules for something like that would be.

[Killer Cyborg]

Lasers emit light waves. Electromagnetic radiation. Energy. They're not emitting matter, they're emitting energy that can affect matter. If I understand correctly, it does damage by transferring energy to the electrons of nearby matter, causing molecular bonds to break down. This generates a thermal "cutting" effect.

Whereas a particle blasts (and yes, Ion beams, which are a type of particle beams) literally use particles/ions as "bullets". They emit matter, not energy.

What do you think that light IS?
It's photons.
Particles.

But light is also a wave.

Also =/= only

[Natasha]

Worth a house rule. I like the kinetic aspect because while a laser may be damaging your armour, it's not exerting force on you; you can walk through it. Well, that's not 100% true, but I guess that the Force is going to be a small decimal with lots of 0's immediately after the dot.

[Natasha]

IRL I'm not really sure how much kinetic energy it really imparts, "tremendous kinetic energy" is relative. It reads like it does the same thing as a laser. This sounds cool but how much mass is there to actually transfer kinetic energy and physically impart massive damage like a bullet does? There's lots of acceleration but if the mass is measured in many 00000's after the decimal then it still doesn't add up to much force. It seems like the explosive transfer of heat energy is the real damage dealer. Remember we have particles pass through us daily, they might be attributed to some forms of cancer but we don't immediately die from them.

I agree.

For in game, however, I went for it's worth a house rule. Rifts is extensively soft sci-fi, so I was going more for the effect of shooting somebody with a laser and not slowing him, while getting shot with a particle gun would slow him (as if he were shot with any other kinetic round).

Essentially I wasn't commenting so much on the nature of the damage but on the possibility to change a charger's velocity via collision.

[cchopps]

We have house-ruled for a while now that PB doesn't count as energy under most circumstances. It has been part of an ongoing "arms race" backstory between those who make PB and techno-wizards and the like who tinker with Energy Immunity type magics.

C. Chopps

[Natasha]

PS- Looking over the results..."Pretty lights" and "I hate science" were disturbingly prevalent choices.

To be honest, Rifts kinda makes me wanna go that route.
I don't, of course, but sometimes I wish I did.

[Natasha]

Hey, I voted for pretty lights because it's all about the lightshow, the action, and the story.

I just can't understand why anyone would need a perfect, logical, scientifically sound explanation for every aspect of a roleplaying game.

Hm, speaking for myself, I don't need one for every aspect of a RPG, but a game that's heavily science-fiction is going to be scrutinised, especially by those who are fans of the harder sci-fi. Certainly it's all about the lights, action, and story - and if it ends there for people, then great. For some others, there's something underpinning all that. So I wouldn't ding anybody for not caring about science, but I wouldn't ding them for caring about science either.

[Braden Campbell]

It'[s just an energy beam.

You are comparing the impact of the particles to the impact of a railgun... except that you are completely ignoring the titaninc difference in mass between a sub-atomic particle, and a slug of metal the size of my thumb.

True, the particle is moving faster, but its neglible mass means that, comparitively, the railgun hits harder.

[cyber-yukongil v2.5]

I used a similar house rule in some of my games, gave it a minor impact effect so it had a possibility, slim though it was, to knock someone down.

Also had a PB Railgun with a bunch of handwavium about projecting objects in decaying magnetic fields at ridiculous speeds for a serious amount of firepower

[Natasha]

Im not suprised there is a nice amount of support for this house rule cuz it changes stuff up. But if it were to become the new canon rule i think people would definitly have a different opinion.

When i think of energy weapon i think whether or not the weapon is kinetic basically. Or to put it more simply, what causes the damage. Technically a rail gun is an energy weapon cuz it uses kinetic energy to do damage. That isnt how we look at thinks tho. We look at the object being fired as doing the damage. Its the railgin round doing damage. With particle beams we look at heat transfer as what is doin the damage. IMO that is why we call it an energy weapon

See, here we have to be careful about our usage of the word "energy".

A rail gun is not an energy weapon.
The round has kinetic energy; the target has kinetic energy (unless it's completely still). Since the two generally have large differences in velocity, the round generally has more kinetic energy despite the differences in mass. Conservation of momentum says whether or not the target falls down, stumbles, or doesn't even notice. This energy is different from the kind of energy we speak about when we speak about "energy weapons".

[Natasha]

This energy is different from the kind of energy we speak about when we speak about "energy weapons".

I agree, whoch was the point of what i was saying.

Oh. I think I see that now. Hm....

[Dead Boy]

Frankly, I kind of like this proposed house rule. It makes sense both in the basis of real science and on the merits of the RPG mechanics.

As for these comparisons to lasers, those don't hold water. While it is true that the photons in a laser can be considered particles (or a wave, depending on circumstances), unlike the particles in a particle beam, photons are completely 100% massless. Though they may have a slight kinetic push to them, this is only because through a quirk of quantum mechanics, photons somehow still have inertia, which is why they have recoil when fiered or theoretically work they way we think they will when fired at a solar sail.

[Steeler49er]

I say it sounds a lot like how lasers work.

Sept, Laser excite matter via the energy type that they use and Not their inherent mass. Dispite The type of light color used, they all travel at the same speed, and yet some colors of light just Bounce of certain colors of matters' electron shell w/o any effect! Damage from Light occures when a paticular color of light and a particular color of matter don't mesh, the two energies act like an human with an allegic reaction to strawberries...

Partical beams do similar but also appears to throw a little kinetic force into the mix... Or so says WIKIPEDIA





______________________________________________________________________________________________________________RATTZ
Laser beats, Rock, Paper And Scissors!
☻

[cornholioprime]

I have toyed around with this idea myself. I seem to recall a super power under PU1 or PU3, alter-self light IIRC. It was a particle/photon beam and it said it did physical not energy damage. So that might be a game reference for your idea.

IRL I'm not really sure how much kinetic energy it really imparts, "tremendous kinetic energy" is relative. It reads like it does the same thing as a laser. This sounds cool but how much mass is there to actually transfer kinetic energy and physically impart massive damage like a bullet does? There's lots of acceleration but if the mass is measured in many 00000's after the decimal then it still doesn't add up to much force. It seems like the explosive transfer of heat energy is the real damage dealer. Remember we have particles pass through us daily, they might be attributed to some forms of cancer but we don't immediately die from them.

Actually, the difference in damage is quite possibly tremendous, comparing a simple wave/particle stream (L.A.S.E.R.) made up of practically massless particles, versus a simultaneous high-energy/hard particle stream like a Particle Beam.

IIRC, in the Wiki Article on the recent "War of the Worlds" remake with Cruise and Fanning, the 'atomizing' weapons that the Martians were using were demonstrating effects comparable to an ion beam..and as those of us who saw the movie witnessed, the effects of a high-energy/hard particle stream were MUCH more gruesome than a 'mere' laser.

EDIT: Here it is (click on Link).

[cornholioprime]

I have toyed around with this idea myself. I seem to recall a super power under PU1 or PU3, alter-self light IIRC. It was a particle/photon beam and it said it did physical not energy damage. So that might be a game reference for your idea.

IRL I'm not really sure how much kinetic energy it really imparts, "tremendous kinetic energy" is relative. It reads like it does the same thing as a laser. This sounds cool but how much mass is there to actually transfer kinetic energy and physically impart massive damage like a bullet does? There's lots of acceleration but if the mass is measured in many 00000's after the decimal then it still doesn't add up to much force. It seems like the explosive transfer of heat energy is the real damage dealer. Remember we have particles pass through us daily, they might be attributed to some forms of cancer but we don't immediately die from them.

Actually, the difference in damage is quite possibly tremendous, comparing a simple wave/particle stream (L.A.S.E.R.) made up of practically massless particles, versus a simultaneous high-energy/hard particle stream like a Particle Beam.

IIRC, in the Wiki Article on the recent "War of the Worlds" remake with Cruise and Fanning, the 'atomizing' weapons that the Martians were using were demonstrating effects comparable to an ion beam..and as those of us who saw the movie witnessed, the effects of a high-energy/hard particle stream were MUCH more gruesome than a 'mere' laser.

EDIT: Here it is (click on Link).

I'm not sure what that shows? I have read that link before but I still don't get the sense that the damage is from the kinetic energy alone. It seems that the kinetic energy excites molecules by smashing into them and creating a massive heat transfer that causes the target to explode. The electron particle beam heats by the electrical resistance much like an arc welder/cutter.

I did see that one theoretical weapon that states it does damage from kinetic energy alone. And like I said I am not opposed to the idea but from what existing RL science has shown it doesn't seem to work that way. If they make that theoretical weapon and and it blasts large holes in thing without the explosive heat transfer then that would prove the theory.

Nobody ever said that it was a Pure Energy effect -just pointing out from the Article that in addition to the High Energy, you also have a body of massed particles moving near the speed of light.

Once the object being 'propelled' is anything with more mass than a virtually massless photon, you have a high-energy, (relatively) high-mass object on your hands.