Something fishy about this

[GFawkes]

I'm attempting to get a campaign rolling and recruited two new members. For their characters, they pitched an interesting concept:

 

Both characters are technopaths (mentally communicate with machines). They have a hard drive somewhere that stores all the information they see and smell and feel and hear. Because they are both hooked up to the drive, they have a Mind Link between them.

 

I've already designed a campaign, and both are aware that combat is going to be a big factor in it. However, they remain adamant that their design will work. Something seems a bit 'off' to me about this. Can anyone help spot it?

[Xavier Onassiss]

Re: Something fishy about this

 

I'd let them do it, but make sure they're specific about where that hard drive is kept and how it's protected. If someone finds out how their Mind Link works, that could be used against them, possibly without their knowledge. (If I was their GM, it would be pretty much inevitable, really....)

[baronspam]

Re: Something fishy about this

 

What is the rest of the character build like? That sounds like a mind link with a cool special effect, but it really says nothing about overall combat effectivness. Did you create campaign guidelines for things like DCs, OCV, DCV, defences, etc? How do they stack up there? If you are planning a supers campaign with frequent combat and you have two characters whose schtick is "mind link", yes, thats a problem. If they have significant combat abilities aside from their mind link I don't see an issue.

[baronspam]

Re: Something fishy about this

 

I'd let them do it' date=' but make sure they're specific about where that hard drive is kept and how it's protected. If someone finds out how their Mind Link works, that could be used against them, possibly without their knowledge. (If I was their GM, it would be pretty much inevitable, really....) [/quote']

 

If they got any kind of limitation points for the hard drive I totally agree. If not I would write it off as a genre trope, kind of like no one figuring out that Clark Kent and Superman are the same guy.

 

BTW, they paid points for the mindlink, right? If so, cool, if not, bust that nonsense immediatly.

[GFawkes]

Re: Something fishy about this

 

The rest of their build pretty much revolves around the Mind Link. I asked one of them about their basic combat plan. He said "Run". Their other abilities are immortality from natural causes (They can die from anything but old age), extremely enhanced senses, and PS/KS related to computers.

 

My plan after hearing these ideas was to throw something similar to the Stuxnet virus at them. The real virus infects industrial computers, records data of when it is working properly, and then plays back the data while it destroys the system.

 

They are two separate people, though I'd consider them to be a single person.

[Blue]

Re: Something fishy about this

 

Spot something wrong? Only that your players don't listen to you.

 

I'd point out to them that if they're happy with long stretches of combat where they are completely useless and sitting on the sidelines, then run with it. My Champions fights are never short, even when I try to make them short.

 

The phenomenon of players who don't listen is not a new thing. I set up my campaign and said, "Make whatever you want on X points, but no time travelers, no aliens." So I wound up with three time travelers and an alien out of 7 characters. They were quickly converted to fish-out-of-water characters (No actual time-travel powers; they were just anachronisms). I wanted to kneecap all four players for ignoring my very meager request.

[baronspam]

Re: Something fishy about this

 

The rest of their build pretty much revolves around the Mind Link. I asked one of them about their basic combat plan. He said "Run". Their other abilities are immortality from natural causes (They can die from anything but old age), extremely enhanced senses, and PS/KS related to computers.

 

My plan after hearing these ideas was to throw something similar to the Stuxnet virus at them. The real virus infects industrial computers, records data of when it is working properly, and then plays back the data while it destroys the system.

 

They are two separate people, though I'd consider them to be a single person.

 

My main advice is to run a session where they characters can't just run without totally loosing whatever the game objective is, and then brutalize them, capture them , further brutalize them, and then ask if they want to build some characters who actually have combat abilities.

 

Clearly these guys are idiots. I mean that with love. Many gamers are. But if you tell someone in no uncertain terms that the game you have in mind will feature frequent combat, and they build characters with no real combat abilites, you have the choice of either booting them out or teaching them. Teaching them consists of opening every game session with a combat that leaves the characters bleeding from every oriface in a ditch untill they get the point. Better yet, a few agets with hand gernadaes, and they will have no option but to make characters who can actually fight, while the rest of the group roll plays the funeral scene.

[BoloOfEarth]

Re: Something fishy about this

 

Both characters are technopaths (mentally communicate with machines).

 

It seems to me that, completely aside from the Mind Link, they could easily expand upon the above ability to have some combat effectiveness.

 

e.g. Control an agent's blaster to not fire, or to fire at the wrong time, or overload. Turn on or off someone's jetpack, preferrably at an inopportune time. Blind someone using high-tech goggles. Shut down motor reflex systems on a battlesuit (a variation on a Mental Paralysis type Entangle).

 

Of course, all of this is only effective against foes with high-tech stuff. Even a simple gun would screw the PC heroes over.

 

Depending upon how powerful of technopaths, they could create makeshift weapons and armor out of tech stuff around them. (Wave the hands, the parts come apart and rearrange, and a microwave oven becomes a heat ray gun.)

 

Now, if the players aren't trying *anything* of use other than the Mind Link, yeah, they're not listening. Time to get out the clue-by-four and give 'em a couple whacks.

[secretID]

Re: Something fishy about this

 

Everything else aside, why does a campaign need two identical no-combat characters? Why would two players want to play identical characters? Is this a freaky sex thing? ( :

[Sketchpad]

Re: Something fishy about this

 

Honestly, I would suggest that they keep the Mind Link, but develop power sets that deviate a bit ... maybe gaining an Aid when they're within touch distance between them, or access to a special attack (ala Aurora/Northstar or the VonStrucker kids). Maybe one can control the physical aspects of machines, while the other controls the data stream ...

[CrosshairCollie]

Re: Something fishy about this

 

There is no more certain way to assure that a player will attempt something than to tell him that he shouldn't or can't. I have no idea why human psychology is this way, but it is.

[Lucius]

Re: Something fishy about this

 

I can't imagine why a "technopath" (is that like a psychopath for technology?) in Champions wouldn't have powered armor with blasters.

 

And two people with a mindlink could make an effective combat team. Teamwork <18, Naked Advantage: Indirect (always from partner) are just two abilities that jump to my mind.

 

But one thing that worries me is, what's the origin/explanation/justification? Why are they both immortal? Does that have any connection to their powers over machines?

 

By the way - any weapon is a machine. Even a club is a very simple lever.

 

 

 

I'd ask them to redesign the characters or start new ones.

 

 

Lucius Alexander

 

semipseudoneopalindromedariopathological

[secretID]

Re: Something fishy about this

 

And two people with a mindlink could make an effective combat team. Teamwork <18' date=' Naked Advantage: Indirect (always from partner) are just two abilities that jump to my mind.[/quote']

I think it's more interesting as one character, defined as two closely related individuals. It reminds me of write-ups posted here a while back of powers built with a duplication sfx without using Duplication.

[Cancer]

Re: Something fishy about this

 

There was a campaign I played in where one character was something like a technopath, in that he communicated with machines (and, so some extent, could talk them into doing things). That power was built as a Summon of a mentality within whatever machine the character tried "talking to". It took some work for the GM to come up with appropriate levels of mentality and cooperativeness during play, but the player wasn't trying to be abusive with it and it worked out OK. If you can convince machines to do your bidding, well, the character isn't going to be a front-line combatant but he won't be worthless for combat in most urban environments.

[Ockham's Spoon]

Re: Something fishy about this

 

How many points are these guys built on? I just don't see this Mind Link power sucking up all the points of superheroic level character. Where did they spend the rest of their points?

 

Some people are okay with not being the combat monster, and if that is the case more power to them (although I have never met a player that liked being useless, so some combat ability is almost certainly needed). My bigger concern would be that they are playing essentially the same character. Even if they play the two characters with radically different personalities they will be stepping on each other's toes power-wise. Also it means fewer plot hooks for the GM to work with since they are basically the same guy. I agree with secretID that this would work better as one character with Duplication, run by only one player.

[JusticeZero]

Re: Something fishy about this

 

It's because when you say "Don't Do X", they have to start thinking of an idea and they already have "X" in the forefront of their minds. Then it's just a matter of their ruminating sounding like "No X. No X. No X. X, X, X, X. No X... X... X... X... X... X... X... Hmmm. I know! I'll make X!"

 

Give them guidelines for what you DO want instead. Instead of "No non-combatants", say "I expect your characters will have some combat abilities." Instead of "No time travelers and aliens", try "Make modern day people. The power origins give powers to the sort of people you might meet on the street."

[Rune]

Re: Something fishy about this

 

Do these characters have Eidetic Memories? That can be a nuisance some times when the Players don't bother to retain the most basic information because "their character would know it." Obviously, the lack of combat ability is a problem. Where did the rest of their points go?

[Badger]

Re: Something fishy about this

 

It seems to me that, completely aside from the Mind Link, they could easily expand upon the above ability to have some combat effectiveness.

 

e.g. Control an agent's blaster to not fire, or to fire at the wrong time, or overload. Turn on or off someone's jetpack, preferrably at an inopportune time. Blind someone using high-tech goggles. Shut down motor reflex systems on a battlesuit (a variation on a Mental Paralysis type Entangle).

 

Of course, all of this is only effective against foes with high-tech stuff. Even a simple gun would screw the PC heroes over.

 

Depending upon how powerful of technopaths, they could create makeshift weapons and armor out of tech stuff around them. (Wave the hands, the parts come apart and rearrange, and a microwave oven becomes a heat ray gun.)

 

Now, if the players aren't trying *anything* of use other than the Mind Link, yeah, they're not listening. Time to get out the clue-by-four and give 'em a couple whacks.

 

Heck, they dont even need to be that inventive. Just "hack" into some guard robots and you got a small force at your disposal.

[Badger]

Re: Something fishy about this

 

How many points are these guys built on? I just don't see this Mind Link power sucking up all the points of superheroic level character. Where did they spend the rest of their points?

 

Some people are okay with not being the combat monster, and if that is the case more power to them (although I have never met a player that liked being useless, so some combat ability is almost certainly needed). My bigger concern would be that they are playing essentially the same character. Even if they play the two characters with radically different personalities they will be stepping on each other's toes power-wise. Also it means fewer plot hooks for the GM to work with since they are basically the same guy. I agree with secretID that this would work better as one character with Duplication, run by only one player.

 

 

 

Yeah, I have to admit I tend to want to be a combat monster.

 

Though, I did create a character (never got to use) that was more of a healer (others only) , but who did have some combat techniques, but was petrified of using them. That might have been interesting to role play.