The Mind Controlling Hero

[Mentor]

Re: The Mind Controlling Hero

 

Count me as one of those who doesn't see Mind Control as an evil or unethical power.

 

Revengers assemble. Bluto and the Bully boys have invaded city. How shall we handle them?

 

Immeasurable Hunk; "Me bash till they bones break and ears bleed."

 

Crowd; "Yay!"

 

Inflamaman; "I'm gonna fry them and suck the air outa' their lungs with my Inferno blast."

 

Crowd; "Yay!"

 

Badger Emo Teen Obsession Man: *snik* "Slice their spleen out then pout about my bad memory."

 

Crowd; "Yay!"

 

Cerebelo Gal; "I shall grip their will and make them reveal their headquarters and then surrender meekly to the authorities."

 

Crowd; "Eeeww."

 

No, not so bad.

[Clonus]

Re: The Mind Controlling Hero

 

Now's here's a more significant question. Is it a boring power? Used by villains, it's OK. It's an excuse for heros to fight. But is it interesting for the bad guys to just give up without even any conversation?

[Hermit]

Re: The Mind Controlling Hero

 

Now's here's a more significant question. Is it a boring power? Used by villains' date=' it's OK. It's an excuse for heros to fight. But is it interesting for the bad guys to just give up without even any conversation?[/quote']

 

Depends, is Howler swaying to stronghold in one of her skimpier costumes or is it Grond scratching himself as he goes?

 

Note to self: Seek pig emoticon

[Checkmate]

Re: The Mind Controlling Hero

 

If you want to bag that sweet young girl, is it more ethical to:

 

- use your Seduction skill to persuade her that you really, really love her, you'll be together forever and you and she should prove your love for each other

 

- threaten her with a knife if she refuses

 

- get her drunk to lower her resistance and judgement

 

- Mind Control her

 

and, regardless of the method, walk out and never see her again?

 

Perhaps I am mentally deficient, but I fail to see how any of the four is able to occupy morally higher ground.

Do you seriously believe someone who's a smooth talker is just as despicable as a rapist?

 

I also don't have ANY sympathy for someone who got drunk and agreed to have sex when their inhibitions were low, as long as they made the choice to drink alcohol, it is completely their fault.

[Enforcer84]

Re: The Mind Controlling Hero

 

Well, if Smooth talker had every intention of disappearing after he got what he wanted, I'd say he's despicable, but probably not as bad as the guy who gets off on hurting them.

 

I would put him on par with the guy who's not as smooth but makes up for it in date rape drugs.

[Comic]

Re: The Mind Controlling Hero

 

We should remember, considering the topic, that many posters to this thread might be mind controlled to say things we don't really mean.

 

That would also account for much of what passes for political discourse, too, I think. Clearly, those diabolical mind controllers are interested in politics, but in a perverse and somewhat incoherent way.

 

Mind control. It's my excuse.

[Checkmate]

Re: The Mind Controlling Hero

 

Well, if Smooth talker had every intention of disappearing after he got what he wanted, I'd say he's despicable, but probably not as bad as the guy who gets off on hurting them.

 

I would put him on par with the guy who's not as smooth but makes up for it in date rape drugs.

I think even that is too harsh. It comes down to a choice and consent. With the date rape drug no consent was given. It truly is rape. With the smooth talker, the partner gave consent. If you don't know the person well enough to know that they're just saying anything to get into your pants, you should probably be keeping your pants on around them anyway. The "victim" of a smooth talker agreed to sleep with someone they didn't know that well, so again I have little sympathy.

[Psybolt]

Re: The Mind Controlling Hero

 

My first Hero character was a heroic mentalist, Psybolt. Of course, as I developed him and became a GM, he became a villain as the power got to him. Heroic mentalists can be done... but the power can corrupt

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: The Mind Controlling Hero

 

I think even that is too harsh. It comes down to a choice and consent. With the date rape drug no consent was given. It truly is rape. With the smooth talker' date=' the partner gave consent. If you don't know the person well enough to know that they're just saying anything to get into your pants, you should probably be keeping your pants on around them anyway. The "victim" of a smooth talker agreed to sleep with someone they didn't know that well, so again I have little sympathy.[/quote']

 

Contrast "smooth talker" with high levels of PRE skills, "smooth talker" with a Superskill mind control that requires a PRE roll and "smooth talker" with mind control - which simply results in you doing as requested.

 

BTW, the guy withthe knife is the typical Hero character with an EB, HKA, HTH attack and/ or RKA, isn't it? Your comments seem to indicate the individual getting his way through physical force is the worst of the lot.

[Victim]

Re: The Mind Controlling Hero

 

Some people would rather die than betray their beliefs. Mind control sidesteps their convictions.

[Comic]

Re: The Mind Controlling Hero

 

Can mind control touch belief?

 

Values, attitudes and beliefs form a core of personality.

 

Forget the concept of 'strongly held' beliefs.. silly and incongruous ideas can be as deeply and impenetrably ingrained in people as any highflown principle, and the same negative consequences of violating the smallest and most inconsistent of these quirks might apply as to matters of universal truth, millennial faith or profound morality. Even if evaluated rationally and persistently treated by a willing person with experienced help, the silliest, or even most detrimental value, attitude or belief might never be overcome. And who is to say, really, that any value, belief or attitude is silly or detrimental, if the holder of said precept places it more highly than others?

 

Some people might choose to identify actions taken while mind controlled as not their own, but the mind controller's using the victim's (no offense, Victim) bodies as vehicles, and even make similar justifications for the case of threat, drugging (just mind control with chemical special effects), physical force, immense presence combined with circumstantial modifiers, or even malicious persuasive influence. There may be a grey area or a scale where the majority differ in how much store they place in such justifications, but almost everyone buys into this reasoning at some point on the scale between "Everything is my fault," and "Nothing is my fault."

 

So while some might regret actions in violation of their beliefs while under duress (and that's normal), if they can't get over the notion that it just might not be their own fault once the duress or actions end, then they're free to curl up and die, if that's what they choose to value over living with it and moving on.

 

The same argument applies to mental illusions and some uses of images.

 

Psychic surgery, transformation and deep telepathy are more likely causes for violation of belief, in that these are the effects that change their targets. All of them could just as easily directly implant the attitude that the target wants to die, and/or the belief that they've violated something vital to the core of their personality. Call this an 'Angst Attack'.

 

It may come across that I have little sympathy for excessive angst, so I wouldn't really waste much time playing Angst Attack type games. If this is your concern, then you have my sympathy. If mind control leads to Angst Attack, I'm all for avoiding it. But then, I never understood Angsters, really, so I can't predict what might set them off, and what might not. I'd have thought guys running around with sharp pointy objects sticking them into people would do it.

[Clonus]

Re: The Mind Controlling Hero

 

Problems with mind control:

 

1. As a default, it's invisible. Thus it can be used much more freely than punches in the nose. Associates of the mind controller must take it on faith that they are not being tampered with.

 

2. It is temporary if you're actually using Mind Control. This creates the problem that unless you want the guy who is now "on your side" to revert and become an opponent again, you are going to have to do something longer lasting to him, while he is still helpless. Needless to say, "permanent" Mind Control would be worse when used on an unconsenting victim.

 

3. It forces people to turn on those who trust them.

[Comic]

Re: The Mind Controlling Hero

 

Problems with mind control:

 

... which hardly seem either exclusive to or inherent in mind control?

 

1. As a default, it's invisible. Thus it can be used much more freely than punches in the nose. Associates of the mind controller must take it on faith that they are not being tampered with.

 

And yet, it's about as expensive and difficult to fairly reliably use mind control truly invisibly as it is to use punches to the nose (or their equivalents). If mind control is your big attack, then after you've used it on one victim long enough that it's apparent they're mind controlled, or after you've used it on several victims, or after someone with mental awareness scopes you out, then you're pretty much known. Whereas someone with stealth and a decent HA is going to keep having the advantage of surprise over and over. There are a lot of invisible or secret ways of doing things, and Mind Control usually is known to the target and detectible in other ways which heroes ought to be on the lookout for, considering it's a genre capability.

 

2. It is temporary if you're actually using Mind Control. This creates the problem that unless you want the guy who is now "on your side" to revert and become an opponent again, you are going to have to do something longer lasting to him, while he is still helpless. Needless to say, "permanent" Mind Control would be worse when used on an unconsenting victim.

 

The first part is a problem only from the point of view of the mind controller, I'd think, while permanent mind control ought to cost so much that it'd be impractical for PCs, just from the point of view of dramatic sense. In between, there are a lot of ways to do 'something longer lasting' to helpless targets, all of which are not mind control, and most of which -- like death and dismemberment -- are arguably worse.

 

3. It forces people to turn on those who trust them.

 

So too do legitimate differences of opinion, mental illusions, images, lies, persuasion, seduction, threat, bribery, hostages, social obligations, duties, conflicting allegiances..

 

In contrast, I'd say mind control forces people to trust their real friends to look beyond their actions and make an effort to help them out where they're helpless themselves.

 

If your problem with mind control is that you don't trust your friends to help you, then possibly the problem is with your friends?

[Victim]

Re: The Mind Controlling Hero

 

Can mind control touch belief?

 

Values, attitudes and beliefs form a core of personality.

 

Some people might choose to identify actions taken while mind controlled as not their own, but the mind controller's using the victim's (no offense, Victim) bodies as vehicles, and even make similar justifications for the case of threat, drugging (just mind control with chemical special effects), physical force, immense presence combined with circumstantial modifiers, or even malicious persuasive influence. There may be a grey area or a scale where the majority differ in how much store they place in such justifications, but almost everyone buys into this reasoning at some point on the scale between "Everything is my fault," and "Nothing is my fault."

 

I think the case is hardly clear cut. There are many forms of "mind control" that might not necessarily use the HERO power Mind Control. And there are many possible sfx for the power itself too (including hyper persuasion type effects). How much the mind control touches on attitudes, values, and beliefs of the targets depends largely on the particulars - it's hard to judge on a broad level except to say that it is a potential problem.

 

The invisibility of mind control doesn't seem like a real ethical problem for the mentalist. It's seems like a complicating factor, but often independent of whether or not a given use of the power is moral. It might lead to temptation though, since the mentalist can get away with things.

 

What the invisibility of mental powers does do is present problems for everyone else. Where does reasonable self defense begin and end if you can be attacked nearly impercebtibly? How much do you have to take on trust? Sure, these are ethical problems relating to mind attacks, but the issues are how other people behave in response, not the mind controllers.

[Clonus]

Re: The Mind Controlling Hero

 

 

And yet, it's about as expensive and difficult to fairly reliably use mind control truly invisibly as it is to use punches to the nose (or their equivalents).

 

No, people notice when you punch them. People don't necessarily notice when they are being mind controlled.

 

 

If mind control is your big attack, then after you've used it on one victim long enough that it's apparent they're mind controlled, or after you've used it on several victims, or after someone with mental awareness scopes you out, then you're pretty much known.

 

Yes they know you have mind control powers. They don't know whether you are using said powers on them.

 

Whereas someone with stealth and a decent HA is going to keep having the advantage of surprise over and over.

 

I think they'll know you sneak around and punch people.

 

The first part is a problem only from the point of view of the mind controller, I'd think, while permanent mind control ought to cost so much that it'd be impractical for PCs, just from the point of view of dramatic sense. In between, there are a lot of ways to do 'something longer lasting' to helpless targets,

 

The point is, attacking a helpless target is squicky.

 

So too do legitimate differences of opinion, mental illusions, images, lies, persuasion, seduction, threat, bribery, hostages, social obligations, duties, conflicting allegiances..

 

Legitimate differences of opinion can not be created at will. Persuasion, seduction, and bribery can simply be ignored. They don't do anything. Hostages are not generally part of the superheroic repertoire. Social obligations, duties and conflicting allegiances remain a matter of free choice. Not to mention of course that if they were swayed by social obligations, they probably wouldn't be fighting superheros. Mental illusions and images are generally ineffective as a method of getting people to change sides.

[FenrisUlf]

Re: The Mind Controlling Hero

 

Super! I can see it now' date=' you use the power on a flying villain and he plummets to his death by being impaled on the stone gargoyles of a gothic church.[/quote']

 

You're big on the Iron Age, aren't you?

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: The Mind Controlling Hero

 

No' date=' people notice when you punch them. People don't necessarily notice when they are being mind controlled. [/quote']

 

Given that the target obeys orders communicated to him, the fact that someone else is telling him what to do is a pretty significant tipoff he's being mind controlled. Of course, it could have that +1/4 "telepathic" advantage. Similarly, however, an EB can have Invisible Power Effects.

 

How can it be more moral or more ethical to beat someone into unconsciousness, then toss them in a cell than to override their free will such that they walk into the cell of their own volition?

 

No chance of long-term or permanent injury, no long-lasting painful reminders of getting beat up, no missed blasts that cause millions in property damage and/or harm innocent bystanders. Seems like getting mind controlled might be preferable to the usual Super answer to differences of opinion.

 

I think they'll know you sneak around and punch people.

 

They don't know whether you're sneaking around waiting to punch them right now. Who's that behind you, a Mind Controller or a Sneaky Puncher?

 

The point is' date=' attacking a helpless target is squicky. [/quote']

 

And I often see the so-called "heroes" decide to "just hit him one more time to be sure he's out". Does physical violence really occupy the moral high ground here?

 

Legitimate differences of opinion can not be created at will. Persuasion' date=' seduction, and bribery can simply be ignored. They don't do anything. [/quote']

 

Tell that to Anakin Skywalker! People with a strong enough resistance to persuasion or seduction, I suppose, can ignore them. Of course, people with a high enough Ego can also ignore mind control, can't they?

 

As to bribery, do you believe letting people starve is bad? Did you know money can be used to buy food? You're using money to own a computer and buy electricity to post on a Newsgroup. You've been bribed by the desire for crature comforts and entertainment into alowing people to starve! Unless you're going to claim you've been Mind Controlled by the ISP and Steve Long...

 

Social obligations' date=' duties and conflicting allegiances remain a matter of free choice.[/quote']

 

So is whether to obey mind control - you only obey if your Ego isn't high enoughto resist the compulsion. Much like a low Ego person is easier pushed ny peer pressure, family members and/or their "duty" to some third party or ideal.

 

Not to mention of course that if they were swayed by social obligations' date=' they probably wouldn't be fighting superheros.[/quote']

 

Depends on the social obligation and the nature of the battle, doesn't it? Superheroes from politically adversarial cultures might both believe they are in the right, and that they must stop the Hated Foe by any means necessary. If Captain Patriot is enforcing the government's determination to keep the masses downtrodden with their jackbooted police thugs , it's up to Mr. Liberty to keep them from beating innocent civilians in the street, isn't it?

 

Not a very silver agy scenario (pretty bronze - ask Green Lantern and Green Arrow), but then a Silver Agy mind controlling hero never gets too edgy with his powers either, does he?

 

Mental illusions and images are generally ineffective as a method of getting people to change sides.

 

Mental illusions to make friends appear as enemies and vice versa is a +20 effect provided as an example in the rules. That's a pretty effcetive method of getting people to change sides. Mind Control could just as easily be phrased as making friends seem like enemies.

[Clonus]

Re: The Mind Controlling Hero

 

Given that the target obeys orders communicated to him' date=' the fact that someone else is telling him what to do is a pretty significant tipoff he's being mind controlled.[/quote']

 

Not really. You just tell him not to remember being commanded like any cinematic hypnotist. It's a hint to others, but not to the victim.

 

How can it be more moral or more ethical to beat someone into unconsciousness, then toss them in a cell than to override their free will such that they walk into the cell of their own volition?

 

It is only moral or ethical to beat someone into unconsciousness if they are actually attacking you.

 

 

No chance of long-term or permanent injury, no long-lasting painful reminders of getting beat up, no missed blasts that cause millions in property damage and/or harm innocent bystanders. Seems like getting mind controlled might be preferable to the usual Super answer to differences of opinion.

 

 

I see no particular reason to assume that mind control wouldn't have the same potential to psychologically screw up people that physical assault has to mess people up on that level.

 

They don't know whether you're sneaking around waiting to punch them right now. Who's that behind you, a Mind Controller or a Sneaky Puncher?

 

The difference is you know when you've been punched.

 

Tell that to Anakin Skywalker! People with a strong enough resistance to persuasion or seduction, I suppose, can ignore them.

 

Or people who just say "I don't wanna."

 

As to bribery, do you believe letting people starve is bad? Did you know money can be used to buy food? You're using money to own a computer and buy electricity to post on a Newsgroup. You've been bribed by the desire for crature comforts and entertainment into alowing people to starve!

 

Nah. I'm not all that strongly opposed to letting people starve in the first place. It's not that I'm in favour of it, mind you, but even if I didn't have electricity I still wouldn't be Mother Teresa.

 

 

Depends on the social obligation and the nature of the battle, doesn't it? Superheroes from politically adversarial cultures might both believe they are in the right, and that they must stop the Hated Foe by any means necessary. If Captain Patriot is enforcing the government's determination to keep the masses downtrodden with their jackbooted police thugs , it's up to Mr. Liberty to keep them from beating innocent civilians in the street, isn't it?

 

If the social obligation is what is driving them to fight you, obviously that's not what you can use to get them to switch sides.

 

 

Mental illusions to make friends appear as enemies and vice versa is a +20 effect provided as an example in the rules.

 

 

True, but then again, that's mind control too.

[jkwleisemann]

Re: The Mind Controlling Hero

 

Addressing a few things....

 

1: "Mind control is unethical because it's invisible and people don't know if you're doing it to them."

 

Actually, only with +20 effect. And if you're scoring enough of an effect to make people do things they Really Don't Want To *and* not realize that they Really Don't Want to Do It? Frankly, you're probably not a PC (48-58 points of effect - against a base-level *normal*.)

 

2: Mind control is unethical because it doesn't expose you to danger.

 

No, mind control is *smart* because it doesn't expose you to danger. Besides - is Superman therefore being unethical when he confronts people who have guns? After all, unless they're packing kryptonite rounds, he's not in any danger....

 

There's an idea among some people, I've noticed, that somehow an action occupies a moral high ground if you've got a good chance of getting yourself killed doing it. It's an ingrained idea; heroic acts are those where you endanger yourself, after all, and beating up somebody weaker than you is cowardly. So, in a way, the Mentalist becomes a psychic bully... and bullies can't be heroes, can they?

 

Personally, I don't buy it. Less heroic? *Maybe*. Less ethical? Nope! If you couldn't be hurt by fire, falling buildings, or smoke inhalation, would you have an ethical obligation to let screaming women and children burn in a fire, because you're not exposing yourself to harm by rescuing them? Is Superman being unethical when he confronts bank robbers and ties them up in spare railroad ties because they can't shoot him and do any damage? Is Spidey being unethical when he snipes a mugger with webbing from behind and ties him up?

 

I certainly hope not.

 

3: Mind Control is unethical because it doesn't give people a choice. Seduction, bribery, etc. can be ignored, but Mind Control can't, unless you've got a high enough EGO.

 

First thought - try pushing your Ego. Problem solved; assuming the GM doesn't rule that it shatters because your Ego is too high for it, you'll have a higher Breakout roll to take it on with.

 

Second thought, more important: I can see where this is a concern, honestly. It *does* have the potential to one-shot many opponents (let's face it - Herculan rapidly does whatever you dang well please, even before you turn to his Psych Lims for help). However, if it's used for *ethical purposes*... then we start running into a situation where the ends really can justify the means.

 

"Well, yes, Mind Man *did* stop Grond from levelling half the city and killing those orphans with a few stern words, but he used mind control! That's despicable! We need to do something about this!"

 

Maybe in Marvel-verse, but normally? That wouldn't fly.

 

Oh, as for the idea that Images or Mental Illusions can't do the same trick? Tell that to the poor schmuck who was standing next to Herculan when a simple Hearing Group Image created the phrase "Stop gettin' in my way, wimp!"

 

Heck, good roleplaying and a knowledge of psych lims can do it. Just tell Ogre that whoever's swinging at you is being a bully, and watch the fun!

 

I'm not going to defend Mind Control on the basis that "well, you don't have to do what they tell you to do." That's *kinda* the point of it, and why it can be an ethical concern (see Teep, linked to earlier.) But that, in and of itself, isn't ethical, it just sets the bar for ethical uses of it a bit higher. Right around the bar used for violence.

 

Is it unethical to ask somebody to give money to charity? Nope. Unethical to *make* them? Yep.

 

Unethical to make a criminal go to jail though? Uhm... I really hope not, though sometimes it seems there are people who think so.

 

And, as has been pointed out before, which is more ethical?

 

"Grond, go to jail."

 

"Yessir." *trundles off to the nice policeman with extra cuffs*

 

or...

 

"Hah! I have beaten the rampaging Grond into submission, causing millions, even billions, in property damage from the Knockback alone! Take him away, officer!"

 

Now, is either one inherently unethical? Given that Grond would probably do more harm if he wasn't beaten down, not really. But the physical violence approach is certainly more irresponsible... and more stupid.

[Clonus]

Re: The Mind Controlling Hero

 

Addressing a few things....

 

1: "Mind control is unethical because it's invisible and people don't know if you're doing it to them."

 

Actually, only with +20 effect. And if you're scoring enough of an effect to make people do things they Really Don't Want To *and* not realize that they Really Don't Want to Do It? Frankly, you're probably not a PC (48-58 points of effect - against a base-level *normal*.)

 

I called it problematic, not "unethical". Obviously your ability to mess with innocent people's heads isn't unethical if you don't use it that way. It presents a temptation to be unethical because you can more easily get away with smoothing your path with little psychic prods. Sure, you probably won't be getting people to do the things they _really_ don't want to do unless it's a really high level game, but then that would be a little obvious anyway.

 

 

2: Mind control is unethical because it doesn't expose you to danger.

 

Mind control does expose you to danger, because the people you mess with obviously usually want to kill you as soon as they recover, and they recover unpredictably.

[jkwleisemann]

Re: The Mind Controlling Hero

 

Presents a temptation, certainly... but a hero who never faces temptation hasn't proven himself, I'd say.

 

It's certainly a risky tightrope to be on. However, my apologies if I misread you; you seemed to be of the opinion that mind control was inherently unethical.

 

(Though, as for the 'tell them not to remember'... that wouldn't fly, if I was the GM. They'd still remember, at the very least, that you told them not to remember something... then if that wasn't enough to beat you up for, they'd break out of the second MC, and remember what the first one was about, and then beat you up even harder.)

[Clonus]

Re: The Mind Controlling Hero

 

 

(Though, as for the 'tell them not to remember'... that wouldn't fly, if I was the GM. They'd still remember, at the very least, that you told them not to remember something... then if that wasn't enough to beat you up for, they'd break out of the second MC, and remember what the first one was about, and then beat you up even harder.)

 

What would be the point of the +20 to be unnoticed by the victim modifier then?

[jkwleisemann]

Re: The Mind Controlling Hero

 

Without achieving the +20, of course.

 

Since I'm a little fuzzy in the brain here, what I was stating was:

 

A simple, unmodified Mind Control command "Don't remember that I mind controlled you" doesn't work. Further, it doesn't work *as a separate command*, even with the +20. In order to make them forget that they were Mind Controlled, you must achieve both the command level, *and* the +20 (turning the effect levels into Ego +30, +40, +50). That's my understanding of it, at any rate.

[Victim]

Re: The Mind Controlling Hero

 

There's an idea among some people, I've noticed, that somehow an action occupies a moral high ground if you've got a good chance of getting yourself killed doing it. It's an ingrained idea; heroic acts are those where you endanger yourself, after all, and beating up somebody weaker than you is cowardly. So, in a way, the Mentalist becomes a psychic bully... and bullies can't be heroes, can they?

 

Personally, I don't buy it. Less heroic? *Maybe*. Less ethical? Nope! If you couldn't be hurt by fire, falling buildings, or smoke inhalation, would you have an ethical obligation to let screaming women and children burn in a fire, because you're not exposing yourself to harm by rescuing them? Is Superman being unethical when he confronts bank robbers and ties them up in spare railroad ties because they can't shoot him and do any damage? Is Spidey being unethical when he snipes a mugger with webbing from behind and ties him up?

 

I wouldn't say that it's unethical.

 

Well, it does seem reasonable that some supers would have some issues when dealing with normal criminals for that reason. It's not like the police get attack helicopters and such - some levels of force aren't really necessary or desireable for law enforcement. Granted, most supers are far better at scaling down damage than conventional attacks. But it seems reasonable that there may be an aversion amongst a few supers to using their powers on normals - or normals without heavy (or superscience) weapons anyway.

 

Even if intervention is moral, that doesn't mean a hero wouldn't feel like a bully afterwards.

[Comic]

Re: The Mind Controlling Hero

 

Q1: "Why did you do that really stupid thing?"

 

Me: "Mind control, must've been."

 

Q2: "Look, if a villain were mind controlling you, wouldn't it be to do something that would somehow profit them, or make sense, or have some logic to it?"

 

Me: "Mind control by a hero, must've been."