Re: [BNW] Active vs. Reactive *possible spoilers* (was Teleporters(*

[Sean Michael Whipkey <highway@cstone.net>]

Steve Crow wrote:
> 
> >I tend to look at it this way.  Look at the Mission Impossible series.
> >Their opponents pretty much _knew_ what the technology available to the
> >team
> >was (what - like the Soviets didn't have the same kind of tech?), but still
> >couldn't stop a well-planned operation based on that technology and
> >ability.
> >
> >I would tend to assume that if you had, say, a modern-day BNW equivalent of
> >the IM Taskforce, with a Teleporter on board, and opponents who were
> >well-enough informed in general of the capability, such a team could
> >probably pull off the equivalent of what they did in the series.  Overthrow
> >nations, kill or or set up dictators, you know...that kind of thing.
> >
> 
> I should have been a bit clearer.  The advantage that an active "teleport
> covert team" (or whatever you want to call them), is that they are the
> active initiator.
> 
> If a teleporter figures out a way to get around a system, then they will
> have the advantage, however short.  But when you're talking about
> overthrowing government leaders and countries, a short-term advantage is
> often all you need.
> 
> One wonders what precautions Kennedy takes against assassination by
> teleport, for instance.  It seems like one determined kamikaze teleporter
> wired with explosives could take him out during one of his open-air speeches
> (like the one on page 77 of the BNW main book).  I'll talk about the main
> reason he can't in Spoilers below.
> 
> The main thing here is the difference between "active" and "reactive."  Most
> comic book characters and groups tend to be reactive.  They sit around, or
> go out on patrol, and wait to spot a burglar, or read something in the
> headlines, or wait for the opposing villain group to launch an assault.
> It's very rare that the comic book equivalent of a PC group _actively_
> initiates a plan, although there are certainly exceptions.
> 
> Haven't read "The Ripper" adventure yet, but the impression I get is that it
> is "reactive" as well
> 
> As for why Kennedy can't protect himself against teleporters...
> 
> POSSIBLE SPOILERS
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> 
> The Facade can't use some kind of power-nullification field around him,
> since (presumably) that would nix his own assumption of Kennedy's
> appearance.    Granted, he may since have had some kind of plastic surgery
> done covertly to make dependence on his power unnecessary, but it would seem
> somewhat odd to do so.
> 
> Or maybe he has a concealable version of thye anti-nullification field that
> the Delta Prime Armogeddon types used against the Defiance assault on
> Patriot's execution?  Either of these seem to be overly-complicated,
> however...

Don't forget, though, that he did survive the blast of '76, presumably
by being in a power-nullification field.  Whether he was witnessed or
not, though, is another a question...

SeanMike

--
SeanMike Whipkey - highway@cstone.net - http://www.cstone.net
Engineering Department, Cornerstone Networks, Inc. - 804.817.7000
HEY! Lay off the SeanMike! The man's a misunderstood visionary!
 - Kermit Labmonkey (aka Ryan Kimmet)