megaplayboy Posted November 30, 2004 Report Share Posted November 30, 2004 Re: Jane's Superhumans OK then' date=' how about this: A person walks into a casino and wins 8 consecutive spins on the roulette wheel, betting the simple "Red/Black." This will happen, on average, to one customer in 256. Is this person an obvious cheat, a precog, or just lucky? Let's say our hypothetical player bets conservatively, starting with $2, then pulls her initial stake after the win. After each following win, she pulls out half of what she's won, walking away from the table with just under $200. You're the casino manager. Do you have her ejected for cheating? If you do, on what grounds? If you get five hundred customers a day at that table, a run of eight red/black guesses will happen about twice a day at that table. So it's well within the bounds of probability for this person to have a run of good fortune, and to pull out before it ends. And yes, I know roulette is much more complex than just betting red or black.[/quote'] that precog is a dumbass--why not just strategically miss a few on the way to winning a lot more? In game terms, I'd allow a precog-based PER roll as a complementary skill roll to gambling. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nexus Posted November 30, 2004 Report Share Posted November 30, 2004 Re: Jane's Superhumans The casino asks the person to leave and never return. The person's face is sent to all casino on the 'heads up' list. Nothing illegal has happened. Bet you didn't see that coming. Then they'd have to do that to every single person that ever gets lucky because they might be a precog. What the maximum number of times you can win? How long does your streak last before you're "blacklisted"? Does it matter how much you win? You'd end up with allot of people "too" lucky to gamble? All right then. Accquire money in some other fashion, walk in, bet it all and win big. Spread it around a little. Lose here, win there, become out positive. You've got time. Casino are going to black list all their big winners for being potential precogs? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitewings Posted November 30, 2004 Report Share Posted November 30, 2004 Re: Jane's Superhumans The casino asks the person to leave and never return. The person's face is sent to all casino on the 'heads up' list. Nothing illegal has happened. Bet you didn't see that coming. And the ejected person promptly goes to the media, saying in essence "I was blacklisted for winning," and challenges the casinos' managements to justify their actions. If they accept the challenge, they'll have to admit that they've effectively blacklisted someone for winning; if they refuse it, then they've tacitly admitted it, at least as far as public perception goes. If they sue for slander, they'll have to prove that they had sufficient grounds for blacklisting - and as I say, any precognitive with two brain cells can pass a test that "proves" they aren't precognitive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nexus Posted November 30, 2004 Report Share Posted November 30, 2004 Re: Jane's Superhumans that precog is a dumbass--why not just strategically miss a few on the way to winning a lot more? In game terms, I'd allow a precog-based PER roll as a complementary skill roll to gambling. I think he was just trying to give an example of how hard it would be blacklist potential precogs without some extraordinary means of detection. That fact that that example is somewhat simple sets up what someone with some brains could pull off. What you could do is have a onsite telepath and make it mandatory that gamblers submit to a mental scan (if that is legal in the game universe) or possibly do it covertly and make a up a reason to eject precogs. Of course, this assumes that telepaths are common enough and/or the casino is rich enough to have on staff. Poorer one might just have to suck it up one way or the other. Here's a thought. What about a probability manipulator? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitewings Posted November 30, 2004 Report Share Posted November 30, 2004 Re: Jane's Superhumans I think he was just trying to give an example of how hard it would be blacklist potential precogs without some extraordinary means of detection. That fact that that example is somewhat simple sets up what someone with some brains could pull off.Exactly right. I chose that example precisely because it's simple, straightforward, easy to analyse statistically, and I've personally seen it happen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nexus Posted November 30, 2004 Report Share Posted November 30, 2004 Re: Jane's Superhumans Exactly right. I chose that example precisely because it's simple' date=' straightforward, easy to analyse statistically, and I've personally seen it happen.[/quote'] Another problem with the blacklist solution is that you'd be blacklisting anyone that won big or too often. It would catch a few cheating precogs, true, but it would also net more normal people that are on a streak and that might have lost it all on the next spin of wheel instead sending them out the door with lots of the casino's money. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lightray Posted November 30, 2004 Report Share Posted November 30, 2004 Re: Jane's Superhumans And the ejected person promptly goes to the media' date=' saying in essence "I was blacklisted for winning," and challenges the casinos' managements to justify their actions. If they accept the challenge, they'll have to admit that they've effectively blacklisted someone for winning; if they refuse it, then they've tacitly admitted it, at least as far as public perception goes. If they sue for slander, they'll have to prove that they had sufficient grounds for blacklisting - and as I say, any precognitive with two brain cells can pass a test that "proves" they aren't precognitive.[/quote'] I'm not much of a gambler, but it's been my understanding that casinos aren't required to give any reason for asking you to leave and/or blacklisting you from returning. They already blacklist people for any number of reasons, to no particular outcry. They may even be able to deny you your winnings without much in the way of an explanation, but I'm less sure of that factoid. I think it will come down to how detectable super-powers are. Can you verify that someone has super-powers? If so, then those legal clauses will simply say that persons with super-powers are ineligable (whether or not you can identify precognition as the super-power). You can't detect super-powers? Then how are you going to have any form of discrimination against any non-persistently visible super-power? Your precog will get bounced like any bad card-counter if he or she wins too often. If he or she is clever, then we're in the same situation we now have with people who successfully count cards or otherwise beat the system at gambling. The casino bets the odds, blacklists those they can catch, and ends up making money off the risk, anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chuckg Posted November 30, 2004 Report Share Posted November 30, 2004 Re: Jane's Superhumans And the ejected person promptly goes to the media' date=' saying in essence "I was blacklisted for winning," and challenges the casinos' managements to justify their actions.[/quote'] They don't have to. Dude, casinos /today/ do that, to suspected card counters. Routinely. All you have to do is have too suspicious a run, get yourself to be suspected, and boom, the Casino Owners' Assocation gets your picture passed around. It is a routine practice that nobody has yet managed to get a public outcry over. Hell, when the Mob ran Vegas back in the 50's, breaking the bank in a casino was a great way to get yourself invited to a cement pouring, unless you were too prominent / famous to disappear. Nowadays, they just ask you not to come in again. This is called progress. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lightray Posted November 30, 2004 Report Share Posted November 30, 2004 Okay. New point to ponder: In the US, we now have a cabinet-level position for Homeland Security. With super-powers, would we likely see a cabinet-level position for Parahuman Affairs? Would it need some trigger event -- massive "super-villain" attack, or government-organized "super-heroes"? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
megaplayboy Posted November 30, 2004 Report Share Posted November 30, 2004 Re: Jane's Superhumans Okay. New point to ponder: In the US, we now have a cabinet-level position for Homeland Security. With super-powers, would we likely see a cabinet-level position for Parahuman Affairs? Would it need some trigger event -- massive "super-villain" attack, or government-organized "super-heroes"? Absolutely, though not right away--look at how much resistance there was to a Homeland Security director, and to a director of national intelligence. They'd probably oversee an investigative and prosecutory division, a regulatory agency, a PRIMUS type outfit, and some kind of research division. Perhaps they'd also act as liaison with various super groups. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kristopher Posted November 30, 2004 Report Share Posted November 30, 2004 Re: Jane's Superhumans Absolutely, though not right away--look at how much resistance there was to a Homeland Security director, and to a director of national intelligence. They'd probably oversee an investigative and prosecutory division, a regulatory agency, a PRIMUS type outfit, and some kind of research division. Perhaps they'd also act as liaison with various super groups. IIRC, the Bureau of Superhuman Affairs in my old game had Enforcement (the paramilitary units and the N-Force teams of government supers fell under that branch), Research, Civil Rights, and Legal (ie, prosecution) Divisions Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest bblackmoor Posted November 30, 2004 Report Share Posted November 30, 2004 Re: Jane's Superhumans The casino asks the person to leave and never return. The person's face is sent to all casino on the 'heads up' list. I thought that this was common knowledge. Apparently, it isn't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Katherine Posted November 30, 2004 Report Share Posted November 30, 2004 Re: Jane's Superhumans I thought that this was common knowledge. Apparently' date=' it isn't. [/quote'] Sure it is. Just in this case, its not really relevant. The person still walks out with allot of the casino's money, and can possibly do it again either by changing their appearance or using a proxie to gamble. Possibly even foreign or illegal gambling establishments could be targeted. This is one Precog using his powers in a half assed somewhat stupid manner. Someone with the wits to plan could get away with allot more most likely. It also doesn't address the problem of how do you determine the limit? Do you ban everyone that gets really lucky in a night? It does happen you know, to perfectly ordiinary people. Given the number of people that play in major casino's its not unlikely. Legally you might be able to blacklist those players but you DO NOT want to accquire a reputation for punting people seemingly just for winning too much. You want the rubes to keep coming in. For that matter, big winners are ususally treated quite well because they are publicity that draw in more suckers. You can kick card counters more freely because cards are, in part, skill games. You can cheat. Its very difficult if not impossible to cheat at games which are practically totally chance, like Roulette. I've seen people get on some amazing streaks. Unless power detectors/analyzers can be brought at Radio Shack, enforcing a "No Precog" rule is going to be more complicated that adding another line of fine print which essentially says "We reseve the right to kick you out and deny your winnings on a whim." (Which actually most Casino do have a policy that can limited a customers winnings. It is just -very- rarely enforced because they don't want a reputation for it). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lightray Posted November 30, 2004 Report Share Posted November 30, 2004 Sure it is. Just in this case' date=' its not really relevant. The person still walks out with allot of the casino's money, and can possibly do it again either by changing their appearance or using a proxie to gamble...[/quote'] But these are the same arguments for dealing with cheaters at casinos! Someone caught card-counting or whatever can just go to a casino elsewhere, and do it again (busted in Vegas? casino gamble in Kansas City, then go to Monte Carlo...). The losses to cheaters are already figured in as part of the risk the casino assumes for business. And it ain't that much of a risk on the casino's part. But, really, are we postulating armies of unscrupulous precogs descending on Vegas? Just how common is prescience as a super-power? Unless you're living in Kingdom Come world, the casinos are more likely to worry about the relatively common problem of cheating gamblers than the relatively unlikely chance they've got a rogue precog at the craps table. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest bblackmoor Posted November 30, 2004 Report Share Posted November 30, 2004 Re: Jane's Superhumans Sure it is. Just in this case' date=' its not really relevant.[/quote'] Hmm. Okee-doke. Nevermind, then. Think what you like. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bucky Posted November 30, 2004 Report Share Posted November 30, 2004 Re: Jane's Superhumans IIRC' date=' the Bureau of Superhuman Affairs in my old game had Enforcement (the paramilitary units and the N-Force teams of government supers fell under that branch), Research, Civil Rights, and Legal (ie, prosecution) Divisions[/quote'] I am not sure how this as a cabinet level post. This all sounds like a branch for the DOJ or DOHS to me. With Homeland Security, the means of dealing with the risks could include military, customs, law enforcement, intel, et.al. So grouping those capabilities into one department makes some sense. But since you already have that now, a separate Department of Parahuman affairs does not make a lot of sense. Except.... Not all Supes are threats. Some are good guys. And might need other resources than present in any one agency or department. Witness relocation comes to mind immediately, but that is still a DOJ function. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Mad GM Posted November 30, 2004 Report Share Posted November 30, 2004 Re: Jane's Superhumans If I was a precog, and wanted to make a ton of money at a casino, rather than several tons of money a little more slowly on the stock market, I'd hire myself out to the casino, or become a booky. Pitting yourself against the rich and the powerful (and potentially shady) is asking for trouble. If you want riches, side with the rich, buy them out, and eventually run the casino. If I were a precog, I'd know the outcome of cheating at roulette, so I wouldn't bother with small change just to wind up in cement overshoes. Meanwhile, somewhere back where the thread was originally heading, Jane's is a great idea, and there is no way it wouldn't get published 'in-game'. It would be like a celebrity-signature, bird-watchers, and train-spotters guide, all rolled into one. "Ooh look dear, a gold breasted fire projector with red googles! Look im up in Blackstones! Beautiful ploomage!" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Katherine Posted November 30, 2004 Report Share Posted November 30, 2004 Re: Jane's Superhumans But these are the same arguments for dealing with cheaters at casinos! Someone caught card-counting or whatever can just go to a casino elsewhere, and do it again (busted in Vegas? casino gamble in Kansas City, then go to Monte Carlo...). The losses to cheaters are already figured in as part of the risk the casino assumes for business. And it ain't that much of a risk on the casino's part. But, really, are we postulating armies of unscrupulous precogs descending on Vegas? Just how common is prescience as a super-power? Unless you're living in Kingdom Come world, the casinos are more likely to worry about the relatively common problem of cheating gamblers than the relatively unlikely chance they've got a rogue precog at the craps table. Well, that's pretty much what I meant. The fact you can be blacklisted isn't going to stop someone from trying this scheme. Or one hopefully more complicated. Dealing with it is going to be more complicated than just kicking people out that win too much. Personally, I don't think most casinos would even bother. The thread seems to have taken the path of aggressive agreement. Hmm. Okee-doke. Nevermind, then. Think what you like. The risk of being blacklisted isn't going to stop this sort of thing in a world with precogs, since it was brought up as a deterrant. That was my point. I have no idea what yours was or why exactly your doing the online equivalent of the Superior Strut, but whatever floats your boat. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kristopher Posted November 30, 2004 Report Share Posted November 30, 2004 Re: Jane's Superhumans I am not sure how this as a cabinet level post. This all sounds like a branch for the DOJ or DOHS to me. With Homeland Security, the means of dealing with the risks could include military, customs, law enforcement, intel, et.al. So grouping those capabilities into one department makes some sense. But since you already have that now, a separate Department of Parahuman affairs does not make a lot of sense. Except.... Not all Supes are threats. Some are good guys. And might need other resources than present in any one agency or department. Witness relocation comes to mind immediately, but that is still a DOJ function. And in that game, the BSHA was a DOJ branch. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Katherine Posted November 30, 2004 Report Share Posted November 30, 2004 Re: Jane's Superhumans If I was a precog, and wanted to make a ton of money at a casino, rather than several tons of money a little more slowly on the stock market, I'd hire myself out to the casino, or become a booky. Pitting yourself against the rich and the powerful (and potentially shady) is asking for trouble. If you want riches, side with the rich, buy them out, and eventually run the casino. If I were a precog, I'd know the outcome of cheating at roulette, so I wouldn't bother with small change just to wind up in cement overshoes. I agree here. There would be many many semi legitimate and safer ways for a precog to make money. But you know someone would try something like this. Fast Money is an incredible temptation. Meanwhile, somewhere back where the thread was originally heading, Jane's is a great idea, and there is no way it wouldn't get published 'in-game'. It would be like a celebrity-signature, bird-watchers, and train-spotters guide, all rolled into one. "Ooh look dear, a gold breasted fire projector with red googles! Look im up in Blackstones! Beautiful ploomage!" The Champions Universe's answer to Tobin's Spirit Guide, or maybe Who's Who and What's that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Mad GM Posted November 30, 2004 Report Share Posted November 30, 2004 Re: Jane's Superhumans I agree here. There would be many many semi legitimate and safer ways for a precog to make money. But you know someone would try something like this. Fast Money is an incredible temptation. My point is, a precog would forsee the future repercussions of 'Fast Money', and so avoid it. The Champions Universe's answer to Tobin's Spirit Guide' date=' or maybe Who's Who and What's that?[/quote'] Definitely a What's That guide! It would be printed four-color, of course. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest bblackmoor Posted November 30, 2004 Report Share Posted November 30, 2004 Re: Jane's Superhumans The risk of being blacklisted is going to stop this sort of thing in a world with precogs' date=' since it was brought up as a deterrant. That was my point.[/quote'] Then the methods used by real-world casinos to deal with real-world cheaters are relevant to a fictional world with fictional cheaters. I have no idea what yours was My point was that if you consider the closest possible real-world analogue irrelevant, then there isn't much point in discussing it further. No offense was intended (or at least, very little offense was intended), but if it was just down to "I think this" and "you think that", we would each be entitled to think what we like, right? But it appears I misunderstood what you meant by "not really relevant", since you do seem to think it's relevant. Mea culpa. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Katherine Posted November 30, 2004 Report Share Posted November 30, 2004 Re: Jane's Superhumans Then the methods used by real-world casinos to deal with real-world cheaters are relevant to a fictional world with fictional cheaters. . Check my edit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lightray Posted November 30, 2004 Report Share Posted November 30, 2004 The thread seems to have taken the path of aggressive agreement. Somewhat worrying, that, since IIRC mass agreement on Internet message board threads is one of the signs of the Apocalypse. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chuckg Posted November 30, 2004 Report Share Posted November 30, 2004 Re: Jane's Superhumans Somewhat worrying' date=' that, since IIRC mass agreement on Internet message board threads is one of the signs of the Apocalypse. [/quote'] Yeah, well... I think you all suck! *offerings of gratitude at having averted the Apocalypse may be made to my Paypal account at whodoyouthinkyouarekidding@sarcasm.com* Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.