Question regarding Hacking Automatons

[griffinman01]

I'm new to the forums but I'm a long-time fan of the HERO System and have run a number of campaigns. I've got a question that I'd like some opinions on how to implement an idea. Basically I'm looking at making a gadget-based villain who will have the ability to hack nearby automatons (either defense turrets, bots, or other mindless drone defenses) and I was curious as the best way to simulate and implement such an ability.

 

I know that Automatons are immune to mental powers otherwise Mind Control would be the obvious solution (with it having a limitation that it requires a Computer Programming skill roll) and I don't have any good ideas on an alternative, so I'm curious to see how other people have done something like this in the past and if there are any house rules that people have used to deal with this kind of situation. Also, on a side note, how would you deal with fire-walls or counter-hacking (ie. any defenses that these drones might have to resist a hacking attempt).

 

Second question, while I'm here, this same villain will probably be using a mech suit (think something along the lines of the power loaders from the movie Aliens) and I was wondering if something like that would be best designed as a vehicle (and how you would deal with an exposed pilot in such a case), or as set of powers (linked together by a Multipower or Elemental Control) that is either considered a focus or Only in Heroic ID limitation.

 

Thanks in advance for any assistance.

[Derek Hiemforth]

Re: Question regarding Hacking Automatons

 

I know that Automatons are immune to mental powers otherwise Mind Control would be the obvious solution (with it having a limitation that it requires a Computer Programming skill roll) and I don't have any good ideas on an alternative' date=' so I'm curious to see how other people have done something like this in the past and if there are any house rules that people have used to deal with this kind of situation.[/quote']

 

I'd probably apply a bit of Handwavium due to the SFX, and have him use Mental Powers (i.e., Mind Control), but base the difficulty of control, the EGO to overcome, etc., on the traits of the designer of the Automatons. The rationale being that the "better" the designer was, the harder the Automatons will be to control. So yeah... for this SFX, I'd probably assign them Mental Powers-related traits based on their sophistication (as assumed by the skill of their designer).

 

Also' date=' on a side note, how would you deal with fire-walls or counter-hacking (ie. any defenses that these drones might have to resist a hacking attempt).[/quote']

 

Given how I'd handle the power, I'd probably assign some Mental Defense based on the sophistication of the defenses. To general attacks on them (not the above power specifically), such things could be technological implementations of Security Systems, or even Cryptography, to oppose incoming Computer Programming (or similar) attempts.

 

Second question' date=' while I'm here, this same villain will probably be using a mech suit (think something along the lines of the power loaders from the movie Aliens) and I was wondering if something like that would be best designed as a vehicle (and how you would deal with an exposed pilot in such a case), or as set of powers (linked together by a Multipower or Elemental Control) that is either considered a focus or Only in Heroic ID limitation.[/quote']

 

Normally I'd say the rule of thumb is that if you "wear" the vehicle, and are likely to be encountered in it whenever you're encountered, better to make it as a Focus or OIAID. If you only use it sometimes, and may be encountered without it, it's a better candidate for being a Vehicle.

[NuSoardGraphite]

Re: Question regarding Hacking Automatons

 

Did classes of minds go away in 6e? In the 4thway edition version of The Ultimate Mentalist, they introduced the concept of classes of minds and you chose a default class of minds your psionics worked against and one of the classes of minds was "Machines" (computers). I would personally use an ECV based on the complexity of the computer system being controlled and use 1/2 of the computers INT as its "EGO" unless the computer was an A.I. worked like a charm. As mentioned above, mental defense can represent countermeasures Kas well as a mental damage sheild construct) to intrusion. I would base this all on the characters Computer Programming skill of course (Requires a Skill Roll)

[griffinman01]

Re: Question regarding Hacking Automatons

 

Thanks for the quick replies!

 

I kinda figured that doing some fudging with Mind Control would be the easiest way to do it, the main thing I was curious about was how to deal with the ECV value for it. Both of those options sound really good ways to deal with that so I'm going to figure out which one would work the best.

 

For the second half the main thing I'm kind of hung up on is that the fight I'm planning for this character is a multi-stage fight. The first phase is you see the guy in this large, custom-built mech suit that will eventually fall apart (due to ablative defenses failing) or overheat (runs out of the endurance reserve). Once the mech suit fails, the character jumps out and tries to continue the fight by hacking some of the nearby machines in an attempt to cover his escape. This is making me torn since this sounds like it should be more of a vehicle in this case since I'm planning on the suit falling off (and that the fight will continue with just the pilot being involved), but the pilot will be exposed to the attacks so I would assume that it would be considered armor and that anything that punches through the mech's defenses would hit the pilot (which also leaves the possibility that they can knock him out before he has a chance to try and run).

 

I'm probably trying to overcomplicate this, but I try to do things as 'by the book' as possible in order to keep things from being unbalanced. Plus I have a lot of very creative thinkers in my group and they're always coming up with unconventional means to solve issues, so the more sense I make of it now, the better prepared I am for when these guys try to exploit it.

[psyber624]

Re: Question regarding Hacking Automatons

 

IMO it all depends upon how much complexity you want to work into it. In order for something to be an Automaton there must be some way to "program" it to accept commands (ie an interface).

 

At that point I would simply allow some skills to be bought like powers, with advantages and such (Computer Programming, Ranged:LOS, Custom Advantage: No Interface Required)

The value of the Custom Advantage would be set by the GM to make sure that the final cost is relative to the power level (how often is this guy going to run into automated sentries, robots, and the like.) Base the difficulty of the roll on the security of the creator (Retail 8-, Business Use 11-, Government 14-, Military 18- etc). Then you can simply use this as the target difficulty he needs to beat, possibly modified by a Security Systems roll. You could also then allow some appropriate limitations too (such as Focus, if this is a gadget he uses to manipulate other devices.) With this power he would be able to control anything without a "mind" that was controlled by a computer chip, from a Microwave to Robotic Sentries. If he wants to do anything more complex, such as enable them to respond to voice commands when they have no means of normally interpreting audible commands, its going to require either a Transform of some sort, or major Handwaverying

 

The issue with using mental powers is that Automatons have no way to "break out" vs mental powers. And a robot, turret, etc shouldnt either, unless someone is monitoring them and actively trying to prevent the intrusion (which becomes a skill vs skill contest).

 

The "Machine" class of minds is more appropriate for sophisticated A.I. which are NOT Automatons, they are simply metallic life forms (although they might be designed with some Automaton only powers at GM's discretion) These things DO have minds, have the ability to make decisions and such, and therefore qualify for Machine class minds (although if sufficiently sophisticated (ie Marvel's Vision) they should probably have dual class minds and be affected as Human and Machine, esp if they are PC's).

 

As far as the suit goes, it all depends on what kind of limitations you want to deal with.

Unified: (replaced Elemental Control) Anything which affects any part of the suit will automatically affect all of it (so any form of drain, supress, etc will seriously hurt you).

OIHID: You cannot LOSE the powers, but you may be caught without them and have to do without them till you have a chance to "change ID's"

Focus: You may LOSE your powers for some amount of time as they can be taken away from you. Other issues based upon the type of Focus you use (ie someone else may be able to get into your suit and use it.)

Vehicle: Not really appropriate for this unless you are designing it SPECIFICALLY so that anyone could use it. Also, you shouldn't use it very often if this is the case. Buying these sorts of powers as a vehicle is very "munchkiny"

 

Exposed passenger is easily done with Activation rolls on your armor applied to the "suit", or in heroic style campaigns (or ones where hit locations are used) you can simply determine which locations are affected and which aren't.

[griffinman01]

Re: Question regarding Hacking Automatons

 

IMO it all depends upon how much complexity you want to work into it. In order for something to be an Automaton there must be some way to "program" it to accept commands (ie an interface).

 

At that point I would simply allow some skills to be bought like powers, with advantages and such (Computer Programming, Ranged:LOS, Custom Advantage: No Interface Required)

The value of the Custom Advantage would be set by the GM to make sure that the final cost is relative to the power level (how often is this guy going to run into automated sentries, robots, and the like.) Base the difficulty of the roll on the security of the creator (Retail 8-, Business Use 11-, Government 14-, Military 18- etc). Then you can simply use this as the target difficulty he needs to beat, possibly modified by a Security Systems roll. You could also then allow some appropriate limitations too (such as Focus, if this is a gadget he uses to manipulate other devices.) With this power he would be able to control anything without a "mind" that was controlled by a computer chip, from a Microwave to Robotic Sentries. If he wants to do anything more complex, such as enable them to respond to voice commands when they have no means of normally interpreting audible commands, its going to require either a Transform of some sort, or major Handwaverying

 

The issue with using mental powers is that Automatons have no way to "break out" vs mental powers. And a robot, turret, etc shouldnt either, unless someone is monitoring them and actively trying to prevent the intrusion (which becomes a skill vs skill contest).

 

The "Machine" class of minds is more appropriate for sophisticated A.I. which are NOT Automatons, they are simply metallic life forms (although they might be designed with some Automaton only powers at GM's discretion) These things DO have minds, have the ability to make decisions and such, and therefore qualify for Machine class minds (although if sufficiently sophisticated (ie Marvel's Vision) they should probably have dual class minds and be affected as Human and Machine, esp if they are PC's).

 

As far as the suit goes, it all depends on what kind of limitations you want to deal with.

Unified: (replaced Elemental Control) Anything which affects any part of the suit will automatically affect all of it (so any form of drain, supress, etc will seriously hurt you).

OIHID: You cannot LOSE the powers, but you may be caught without them and have to do without them till you have a chance to "change ID's"

Focus: You may LOSE your powers for some amount of time as they can be taken away from you. Other issues based upon the type of Focus you use (ie someone else may be able to get into your suit and use it.)

Vehicle: Not really appropriate for this unless you are designing it SPECIFICALLY so that anyone could use it. Also, you shouldn't use it very often if this is the case. Buying these sorts of powers as a vehicle is very "munchkiny"

 

Exposed passenger is easily done with Activation rolls on your armor applied to the "suit", or in heroic style campaigns (or ones where hit locations are used) you can simply determine which locations are affected and which aren't.

 

Since my account still requires the waiting period between posts I dunno when this will show up.

 

With regards to breaking out of the mental power I was planning on treating them as if they had 0 EGO but some possible mental defense to simulate some kind of fire-wall. The idea I had with these is that they have some built-in safeguards and anti-hacking protocols that could fight the intrusion and try to regain control. Think of them as trying to reboot themselves to reset to their default programming in the event of an intrusion. So they'd get hacked (via a mind control that only affects machines and requires a computer skill roll) and then their fail-safe's try to regain control of their systems automatically. They're not very sophisticated (these things are pretty much expendable troops) so it'll probably take some time but I figure that they could break out eventually and reboot, kind of like a normal character.

 

For the suit, did Unified come in with the 6th Edition? I'm using my old 5th edition rulebook that I bought back in 2001 or 2002 so I'm only familiar with Elemental Control. I was thinking of using an EC with it but I was never 100% sure that an EC was the way to go with an armored suit like Iron Man. When I first made this guy (before I wanted to clarify the rules here) I went with the OIHID because I figured the suit was custom built and only the villain could figure it out. So I though a Focus or vehicle wouldn't work based on that, especially with your clarification. So I'm thinking of making them unified with an EC and then putting on OIHID. I think suppress and drain affecting them all would make sense since the integrated systems would probably be affected the same. If you drained the suit's power it'd shut everything down. Plus none of the PCs have those skills so it's a non-issue as far as I'm concerned.

 

Thanks for all of the ideas! I think I've got a good grasp on how to get this to work now.

[dmjalund]

Re: Question regarding Hacking Automatons

 

a version of mind control (vs machine minds) based on INT.

[griffinman01]

Re: Question regarding Hacking Automatons

 

a version of mind control (vs machine minds) based on INT.

 

That would work too.

[psyber624]

Re: Question regarding Hacking Automatons

 

Well, if your the GM what you say goes, but if you have any rules lawyers on your team be prepared. Mind Control doesnt work on Automatons unless they have bought a computer mind (then mind control bought to affect machine minds works just fine.)

 

MD as a "fire wall" of sorts could be simulated in this way, but can really cause all kinds of problems (especially if you start dealing with complex AI's). YMMV of course. Also note that you can run into issues with the rule about mind control requiring some way to communicate with the target (when trying to use it on things like turrets and such).

 

And as with many things a lot depends on what you actually want to simulate. If you just want the ability to "change programming" then i believe the skill approach works best. If you want more of a "now they can do anything i command them to" even if its not something they could ordinarily do then mind control is best. If you want them to do something they couldn't POSSIBLY do (ie the animating machines concept) then Transform is the way to go.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Question regarding Hacking Automatons

 

The answer will depend on how automatons are built. Are we talking here a robot with a computer running it? Unless the programmes are being run by an AI, mental powers will not work, even ones targeting machine class of minds: there is simply nothing to aim them at. It will also depend on how you want hacking to work in your game.

 

I would suggest that you could do that with a skill roll, if we want to be simplistic about it. Skill based hacking systems are pretty straightforward and make sense - [resumably skills allowed the automaton to be built and programmed in the first place.

 

If you want more of a 'power' feel, I'd suggest Transform. I know it is seen as a catch all but it really does work here:

 

Reprogramme: Major Transform 1d6 (Instruction set into new instruction set, Another reprogramming) 10 points

 

You could probably use the INT of the governing computer as the figure you need to get 2x the total of for the transform to work.

 

You could also have some sort of 'hacking power', depending on how you want things to work, like EDM to the cyberrealm (leaves body behind) to simulate jacking in. You have an avatar in the cyberrealm that has to complete tasks to 'reprogramme' devices - for example it might have to overcome the guardian (firewall), evade the H/K programmes (ICE) and then capture the cybercore (the actual reprogramming).

 

The 'transform' option should work for anything - the others will only work for whatever system of hacking is in place in your game.

[psyber624]

Re: Question regarding Hacking Automatons

 

Actually, 6e RAW allows Machine class Mental powers to work against any computer (using INT instead of EGO if necessary). [6e2 184]. It does mention that it may not work very well and could easily be assigned penalties by the GM.

 

Only Automatons are defined as being immune to Mental Powers (unless they have a computer brain)

[Sean Waters]

Re: Question regarding Hacking Automatons

 

I seriously wish that the RAW would stick to its guns sometimes.

[griffinman01]

Re: Question regarding Hacking Automatons

 

Actually' date=' 6e RAW allows Machine class Mental powers to work against any computer (using INT instead of EGO if necessary). [6e2 184']. It does mention that it may not work very well and could easily be assigned penalties by the GM.

 

Only Automatons are defined as being immune to Mental Powers (unless they have a computer brain)

 

I think this would be the easiest method since it reduces the amount of 'handwaving' to get it to work and best fits what I'm attempting to do.

[NuSoardGraphite]

Re: Question regarding Hacking Automatons

 

That's why I stopped worrying about the RAW long, long ago. The core concepts are solid. Everything else is negotiable.

[psyber624]

Re: Question regarding Hacking Automatons

 

Trust me, I agree. But I got an extra dose of the research gene running in my blood, and after making a couple of erroneous statemets a couple of weeks ago I am becoming nearly obsessed with double fact checking before I post here.... lol

 

But I guess with the complexity and flexibility of the HERO system, a few cracks in the wall can be forgiven.

[Ockham's Spoon]

Re: Question regarding Hacking Automatons

 

I like Sean's reprogramming Transform, but it has one small flaw in my mind. While conceptually he has built it just right, that is a really cheap power to be able to take over an automatic gun turret. Actually I could say the same for using Mind Control on an automaton.

 

The Advanced Players Guide I has a discussion of using mental powers as Cyberkinesis which I think is exactly what you want. It assigns INT to various devices and determines how much STR you have to operate mechanical stuff.

[Doc Democracy]

Re: Question regarding Hacking Automatons

 

You know, I am just throwing my hat into the ring here as a potential off the wall suggestion.

 

What about simply giving the villain a XD6 Energy Blast, indirect, OIF (bots of opportunity), requires a skill roll, limited to power of focus. That way you get the villain able to deliver bolts of energy upto XD6 based on the turrets and bots surrounding him. The power is useful and can be taken away by removing the 'bots of opportunity'.

 

This takes away any considerations about the mechanics of controlling the towers etc, it just means that the villain can subvert them to his needs. If you want him to be able to stop the turrets attacking him then you use Damage Negation with the SFX that he prevents them from properly targetting him.

 

More than one way to skin a cat....

 

 

Doc

[Sean Waters]

Re: Question regarding Hacking Automatons

 

I like Sean's reprogramming Transform, but it has one small flaw in my mind. While conceptually he has built it just right, that is a really cheap power to be able to take over an automatic gun turret. Actually I could say the same for using Mind Control on an automaton.

 

The Advanced Players Guide I has a discussion of using mental powers as Cyberkinesis which I think is exactly what you want. It assigns INT to various devices and determines how much STR you have to operate mechanical stuff.

 

IIRC, Transform is ranged, but still requires LOS, and presumably, if you can see the gun turret, it can see you - especially as you are using a visible attack. You would probably need several applications of Transform to actually reprogramme someonthing - this only gives you 1d6. This means you may well be exposed to fire for several phases before you take the turret down or turn it on anyone else.

 

Also, if you choose to use this method of programming, presumably the original programmer could have something similar. I'd probably let programmers make it difficult for hackers by building up a Transform/Programme total they had to overcome to change what it does. You could do that on a pretty much ad-hoc basis if reprogramming was becoming too easy.

 

I like the idea of Cyberkinesis, but it is still pretty easy to use: even a weapon turrent with 100 active points in attacks would only have an INT of 20 and require INT+10 to control (30 points being pretty easy to manage - you can 'up' the total, but that is a bit of a fudge: if I wanted a machine to be hard to control, I'd give it mental defence). It also seems odd that active points are necessarily any measure of how difficult something is to control. I'm not clear why a weapons turret with a howitzer on it is more difficult to re-programme than one with a machine gun on it. Well, except for game balance, of course...

 

It is also not clear why an elevator is more 'intelligent' than, for example, a heavily computerised car...or a 'dumb' but powerful robot (which will have a high Simulated INT as it has lots of powers) is harder to control than an automaton with similar powers and a computer brain that only has 10-15 INT - which is quite a lot for many computers. The ECSP Shipboard Computer on 6.2.185 runs a starship with only 8 INT.

 

Finally, Cyberkinesis does use mental powers v machine minds - this means, for eacmple, that it would be VERY cheap for a mentalist to also control machines; 5 points more and you are golden. Another cosnequence of being mental powers is that they are effectviely invisible, partially indirect and have LOS range. The Cyberkinesis discussion does not mention breakout rolls either - presumably something without an EGO score simply would not try, in the same way that transforming an inanimate object is usually permanent (as it does not 'heal').

 

I think the problem with whatever approach is taken will be consistency. I would certainly warn the players, when we introduce something a bit new like this, that there may be some number juggling happening when we know how it all works out.

[Derek Hiemforth]

Re: Question regarding Hacking Automatons

 

Another thought occurred to me...

 

Undead Automatons often take a Physical Complication that they're "Affected By Necromancy," assigning them an EGO for purposes of necromantic Mental Powers, and allowing them to be affected by necromancy-based PRE Attacks. Perhaps technological Automatons in this campaign have "Affected By Hacking" as a similar ground rule...

[psyber624]

Re: Question regarding Hacking Automatons

 

I always thought of Cyberkinesis as TK with the limitation (only to manipulate machines). I dont have the APG's yet so not sure how they do it.

 

After being part of this discussion I am going to have to build my old character again. My screen name comes from my first Champions character, a Cyberkinetic Technopath... Loved that guy, even built a version of him for CoH (with a huge rewrite of his backstory and powers since you couldnt really simulate the same stuff in that game). Should have it up later today, and i think I will be using multiple different suggestions from this thread (as they all have slightly different applications).

[griffinman01]

Re: Question regarding Hacking Automatons

 

That's one thing that's fun with the Hero System (but also can be confusing) is that there's multiple ways to build a power and get any effect you want. I think the easiest way for me to do this (and how I ultimately built the character) is using the 'treat INT as EGO' for these guys. I'm not too worried about rules lawyering since I'm usually the one who keeps it all in check. Thanks for all of the input!

[Ockham's Spoon]

Re: Question regarding Hacking Automatons

 

You know, I am just throwing my hat into the ring here as a potential off the wall suggestion.

 

What about simply giving the villain a XD6 Energy Blast, indirect, OIF (bots of opportunity), requires a skill roll, limited to power of focus. That way you get the villain able to deliver bolts of energy upto XD6 based on the turrets and bots surrounding him. The power is useful and can be taken away by removing the 'bots of opportunity'.

 

This takes away any considerations about the mechanics of controlling the towers etc, it just means that the villain can subvert them to his needs. If you want him to be able to stop the turrets attacking him then you use Damage Negation with the SFX that he prevents them from properly targetting him.

 

More than one way to skin a cat....

 

 

Doc

 

I thought of this too (great minds think alike and all), but even though this allows the villain to attack with whatever device he sees fit, it doesn't prevent the device from being used for its original function at the same time. Most of the time that probably doesn't matter (who is going to be using a backhoe during a super battle?), but if the cyberkinetic is taking over someone else's gun turret or robot and turning it against them you might have a problem.

[gojira]

Re: Question regarding Hacking Automatons

 

The other way to handle this is Telekinesis, Only vs. Machines (or Automatons, or Computers, or whatever). I mention it only for completeness; it looks like you've got a solution that works for you, which is all that really matters.

[Doc Democracy]

Re: Question regarding Hacking Automatons

 

I thought of this too (great minds think alike and all)' date=' but even though this allows the villain to attack with whatever device he sees fit, it doesn't prevent the device from being used for its original function at the same time. Most of the time that probably doesn't matter (who is going to be using a backhoe during a super battle?), but if the cyberkinetic is taking over someone else's gun turret or robot and turning it against them you might have a problem.[/quote']

 

I did consider this. But thought that my solution was not an ongoing control thing, just a simple override to get an attack off. The damage negation could easily be usable on others, to prevent damage from a gun hitting another person. I was attracted to this to prevent all of the concerns over INT and EGO. :-)

 

Would not be a solution for more complex automatons with more abilities but it would make it easier for the GM to assess the power being handed over to the player...

 

 

Doc

[Sean Waters]

Re: Question regarding Hacking Automatons

 

One thing about hacking stuff - what if you want to hack, say, a tank, or some sort of walker-robot-guard-thing. There are a number of different systems: guns, sensors, communications, defences - do you hack 'the whole thing' i.e. the central processing core/mind or individual systems? The answer may not be entirely obvious - bear in mind that Cyberkinesis can be used to 'hack' a focus, which is a part of a character. OTOH, mental powers like Mind Control always work against the central intelligence - anything that it controls is then also controlled, no matter how powerful.

 

I think that you need to have a ponder about these sort of cases to get a general overview of how it would work in game.

 

Another aspect of this we have not really discussed is obtaining information - cybertelepathy - which could also be very useful. Being able to instantly interrogate a mobile phone is pretty easy - but potentially has a lot of useful, even plot-disrupting, information - how much more so a protagonists battle suit.

 

One other issue here is that most people are not going to spend points on specific defences against cyberkinesis - like Mental Defence for their gun. That means that a cyberkineticist is likely to encounter few obstacles to their power.