Survival/Apocalypse RP

Discussion in 'THREAD ARCHIVES' started by Maddeline, Jul 18, 2014.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Title:
    The Remenants
    Date:
    2023
    Synopsis:
    A bacterial infection wiped out a whopping percent (around 84%) of the world no less than 6 years ago.
    Now, with around 234,700,030 humans left, a good portion of society has collapsed. Since those that died were completely random, many governmental figures, terrorist, prisoners, normal people, athletes, actors....just, humans of any kind, proves how indescrimibate the plague was. So many were now just...dead. Governments collapsed and panicking people left most of the world in Anarchy.
    Roleplayers can expect...:
    To control a character wandering the wastelands in kentucky, a landlocked state in the USA. The mostly rural state was hit hard by the plague leaving barren fields and empty towns and cities.


    If you all can think of other ideas to implement, that would be fine ^_^
     
    #1 Maddeline, Jul 18, 2014
    Last edited: Jul 19, 2014
  2. Hm. I would increase the percentage. Hell even if 2/3 of the world died out that would not lead to such an anarchy, except if the disease wouldn't kill most law enforcement workers, soldiers and political leaders. Or electrical installations and power supply workers.... AKA you would need to get rid of one large part of educated and experienced part of humanity which keeps our world save and running.

    A better plot would be a meteor crashing on earth and bringing superresitstant foreign microorganisms whit a nasty knack for eating anything made out of petroleum including petroleum itself. That means that as soon as it spreads everywhere all the plastics, diesel, gas are going to slowly be eaten by said creatures.
     
  3. That would be like NanoBots xD. Almost the same principle would apply..

    So how would the humans survive with these nano things around and A ice age type would be more than intriguing.^^ ?
     
  4. Forty-two percent was the original death toll but there are only a little more than 2 billion left as the years have went by- due to either other people killing them or a lack of political structure. The idea is that the pathogen was quick, fast, and then died out like the Black Plague.
    Considering the majority of the world is china and india, each boasting a million strong, America could be left quite desolate.


    @PureKor
    Hmm....maybe some colder climates start setting in that release the Pithovirus (it's like a virus from the ice age)Click Here to read about the virus-

    Though this strain would be quite malevolent since humans immune systems haven't encountered it for thousands of years.
    How does that sound?
     
  5. It is intriguing I must say xD.

    That's mostly what I stated myself about the ice age ;) a harsher climate and with small/ alien or whatever microbiological things to roam around :)

    Even so.. I'll have to think about this.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  6. But even when losing much more the 42% of the population there was no such chaotic breakdown of the social system during the Black Plague. You would need a type of disease which or:
    1. Has a death tool between 80-near 100%.
    2. Affects the brain in a way similar to rabies.
    3. Attacks a specific part of population - for example a 10 or longer years long plague which would reap a large portion of children would lead to a demographic collapse inside a century.
     
  7. I thought that people would go nuts when everyone else was dropping like flies and start looting, stealing, murdering and etc.
    2 billion could leave everyone in the world dead except for Indians and Chinese;

    How many should be left then?
    Millions?


    And the Black Plague which killed off 2/3 of Europe did have horrible social repercussions and ultimately led to the end of serfdom because so many people died, there were insufficient workers. Also during times of the plague, people weren't as social as they are now and there was a much more stark rich to poor difference- now, everyone is more likely to interact with people of a different social class on a daily basis.
     
  8. If I remember correctly Serfdom existed up to the 19th century in most European countries, finally disappearing mostly around 1848. Also the Black Plague killed between 1/4-2/3 of Europe's population, trough 1/2 is the most accepted amount. The Black Plague did lead to more rights and increased wealth of individuals leading to the Renaissance but it didn't end the existence of serfs.

    The basic social structure didn't collapse and at the best some areas had an increase in looting and criminal activity. A plague in the modern world roughly with the same death tool (in percents) as the Black Death would probably result in something similar like it did back in the Middle Ages - the average paycheck of most profession would rise, as would living standard and so on.

    As you put this disease kills at random which means by the laws of statistics and logic, most dead would be in the two most populated countries - China and India. If it was a engineered attempt at eradicating all the Indo-Europeans in the world then we are talking about something completely different.

    To add, humans and human civilization has a knack for survival, with our current being a bumpy but constant road over 12,000 years long.
    I wouldn't be surprised that in 25+billion years all that is left from the Solar System were human civilizations scattered trough the universe.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  9. I'm specifically talking about western Europe, which is where it was hit hardest. My facts were from the AP world history class I took in all honesty.

    So what would be more effective at throwing everything in chaos-
    80%?
     
  10. I gave some examples - make it extremely potent killing off at least 80% of the population or add that it drives people mad (in that case people will not trust anyone just because the next second anyone cloud go crazy. Considering that society is based on trust it would be a general f**k up for the world) make it target children and skip to fifty years later when the lack of that generation leads to a major world wide demographics crisis. You don't need event to have it target humans - make a disease which inside of a few years killed most of the world's livestock or grains. There are many ways to destabilize humanity but the easiest approach is to hit where it hurts the most - the resources we need for life like food, water, electrical energy and so on.
     
  11. I chose the idea of a disease wiping people out because it would destabilize people's sense of community. Everyone would attempt to steal resources once the resources started to run out...
    But it's not supposed to be so crippling that society can't recover- I think it's important to leave that window open for small militias or state governments.
     
  12. Realistically speaking disease don't go and kill at random. They have patterns of spreading and affecting people. They have a certain death tool and infectivity . Some can take years before showing first signs. But really for an almost total social collapse a really large part of population would need to die out, and even then oasis which were not hit hard would exist. But for a "random" disease like the one you were planning on adding madness like a symptom would be a good choice - considering that then there is good damn reason for people to lose trust in each other.

    As for the resource thing - why bother stealing when there is more then enough loot from the houses of the dead to take? So the resource game would be off until most of the modern transportation workers - truck drivers, train operators, boat crew, airplane pilots, station, port & airport workers, would be dead.

    But really to bring down the United States you just need to take out the Federal Reserves which are the critical and crucial institution - they are the only ones which can print our new money bills after all. Adding a mention that the disease swept those working there would already heavily destabilize the USA if not bring it down - for a sure kill off most of D.C. Then the country is pretty much done fore. As for the rest of the world. Well it all depends on the type of disease, but generally speaking countries with better health care systems and living standard would be much less affected - after all even if it's just the difference of having a doctor in every city or having a doctor in every second city it can affect mortality rates. And areas isolated from the rest of the world would also probably suffer less victims or maybe almost none at all simply due to the fact that none would bring the disease there in the first place...

    I cloud go on and on about this. Really there are more then enough information about pandemics on Wikipedia, in scientific magazines/aricles and as documentaries for one to surf/read/watch a bit and learn about how most diseases behave.
     
  13. The rp takes place years after everyone has died off from the disease- crop like corn can't grow without human intervention and cattle animals can die in a matter of weeks if they do not find an alternative to water. I figure around year one there is ample supplies. Year two, thorough scavenging of stores and houses. Year three and up is people trying to make farms to survive and stealing from everyone else.
    In the walking dead, the zombie to survivor ratio is 5,000 to 1, and it still only took a year before people began intense scavenging- I think you underestimate the amount of food a human will go through in six years. Put the halt on production of that food and people will turn on each other to just survive.
     
  14. You really underestmate the power of trust that humans have and how well can a civilization adjust to new situations. Humanity has managed to survive being brought down to a single tribe, when our only weapons were fire, hunting, gathering and the most basic civilization level of a tribe. So so to think that with all the knowledge today our civilization would not survive a pandemy which would kill less then 80% of humanity is unrealistic from manys point of view. "You underestimate humans to much." "We humans have a certain knack for survival."

    Tthat is why you use on of the following: Have a >80% death tool (>90% would be better just in case) or place the starting point at least 50 years from the pandemy + do not give numbers. Or attack our food, fuel, water and so on. That always works.

    But here is an intresting idea - make it a disease which makes one hypersensitive to some common substance inside most food. And it doesnćt trigger one but it can trigger a variety of hypersentivies. Now imagine if out of 1000 people 401 cloudn't drink milk, 208 cloudn't stand meat, 374 cloud die just from eating grains ... oh and add that it can leads to brain detoration, dementia, madness and finally death. Now that would be intresting.
     
  15. The percent of death was upped earlier to 84%...

    I thought of the disease causing bone dysplasia and cranial elephantitus
     
  16. Now all you have to do is wait for people to come. Hope this works out for you.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  17. You did all this arguing and you're not even interested?
     
  18. Interested I am but I have a few of my own interest checks and a Multiverse Sign Up, two ongoing RPs (Ok one is a Jump In) so I would rather not commit myself to more ATM. After all what would be the point in joining and then leaving. If it were an extremly interesting plot/setting/idea I might jump no matter what but this one is just intresting but not enough.

    Oh I recomend you check my Multiverse Sign Up (Misc section). It's rather intresting... dunno how much you are up for fantasy - but if you are you can also pay a visit to one of the Aerethia interest checks in this section.
     
  19. Oh, I'm totally interested.
    I love apocalypse type rps.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.