[Worm] Horatio's Parahuman Power/Mentality Table

[HoratioVonBecker]

So for years I've had this theory that parahuman abilities, particularly the non-Cauldron ones, are based on coping methods. And I eventually noticed that Brute, Breaker and Striker were basically the same sort of power with different control schemes. I ran with it, hoping for better insight into parahuman psychology. (And as a side effect, a refinement to Weaverdice chargen.)
Much thinking and revision later, including some greatly-appreciated betareading by @aCameron, this is the result. (I hope the slightly-obsolete class names aren't too confusing; he advised changing them and I didn't want to.)

Threats | Responses	Internalize	Dissociate	Lash Out	Externalize
Complicated	Changer	Tinker	Trump	Thinker
Social-ish	Gifter	Jacker	Puppeter	Stranger
Environmental	Streamer	Jumper	Blaster	Shaper
Personal	Brute	Breaker	Striker	Cloaker
Parahuman	Capekiller	Capekiller	Capekiller	Capekiller

CLASS EXPLANATIONS:

Changers can switch toolsets over the course of a fight. Examples for clarity: Eidolon, Marquis, arguably Taylor.
Tinkers distract themselves by designing and building stuff, usually supertech.
Trumps have a highly-adaptable toolset with a narrow focus, typically offensive. Examples for clarity: Flashbang, Gregor the Snail, Citrine, Jouster.
Thinkers are people with some manner of enhanced tactical awareness. (Entities are bad at more abstract processing.)
Gifters can grant one or more powers to other creatures and/or objects.
Jackers are Masters who share some of their minions' senses.
Puppeters (note the 'er' rather than 'ear' sound) are Masters who don't identify with those they manipulate. Emotion-manipulators generally fall in this category. Tend to be jerks, even by parahuman standards.
Strangers have a power suited to concealing themselves. (Entities are still bad at abstract processing.)
Streamers have a 'smooth' mobility power, like flight or superspeed, with no inherent downtime.
Jumpers have a power that moves them in starts and pauses, like airdashing or teleportation.
Blasters have a power suited for shooting opponents.
Shapers change specific environments - summon walls, move earth, make conveyorbelt-forcefields, that sort of thing.
Brutes have a melee-range power that's always on, or at least on by default. Body alterations count.
Breakers access their powers through a distinct altmode.
Strikers have a short-uptime melee power, nearly always offensive.
Cloakers have an area-effect power centered on themselves.
Capekillers have a power that only affects parahumans, or only works in their presence. I don't know much about them.

Powers often have themes of a secondary class, which I call slanting. By this reckoning, Tecton and (to some extent) Bakuda are Tinkers with Shaper slants, Flashbang is a Trump with a Blaster slant, and Taylor is a Cloaker-slanted Jacker. I also use slashes for brevity, e.g. 'Crawler is a Brute/Changer' means 'Crawler is a Brute with a Changer slant'.


This list is probably not appropriate for combat chatter, as it prioritizes mental groupings over tactical ones. (That said, I like to think that budget-focused organizations (PRT) use the following two rankings: "roughly this expensive to leave alone" and "roughly this expensive to arrest".)

Any questions?

 

[We Just Write]

You seem to have fallen under the influence of a Stranger.

 

[HoratioVonBecker]

You seem to have fallen under the influence of a Stranger.

Click to shrink...

Fixed, thank you. (That said, most Strangers aren't people for whom that sentence construction makes sense - it's way easier to avoid detection by passive camouflage than by active tampering.)

 

[We Just Write]

Actually, more comprehensive definitions for the psychological responses would also be nice.

 

[HoratioVonBecker]

Actually, more comprehensive definitions for the psychological responses would also be nice.

Click to shrink...

Sure. Keep in mind that this is mostly surmise, as I don't have a ton of examples to draw from and it's also been a long time since I read the source material. Also I hope this is enough unpacking - I really don't want to sacrifice accuracy for precision, and these are all fairly broad categories.

Internalizers respond to to their trigger by fundamentally redefining themselves, usually in a "so I can't ever be hurt that way again" sort of way. Tend to be quite trigger-specific.
Changers are tricky for me to get a handle on. The seem like they might define themselves by their own fluidity, or possibly the role they've adopted at the moment. (Edit: Actually, they probably define themselves by the ways they adapt, or don't.)
Gifters want good protectors. This is probably going to inform every single relationship they have.
Streamers want to remain mobile at all times. Really going to be upset at being cornered, physically or otherwise.
Brutes tend to have complicated relationships with pain, their own bodies, and/or people touching them.

Dissociators react to their trigger - and most subsequent stressors - by ignoring, compartmentalizing, and finding a way to distract themselves. Tend towards extremes, success-wise.
Tinkers distract themselves with engineering, artistry, making or fixing things.
Jackers distract themselves by identifying with someone or something else, typically something close to hand.
Jumpers distract themselves by leaving, physically and/or mentally. Closing eyes, running away, that sort of thing.
Breakers distract themselves by pretending to be something that can handle the problem directly.

Lashers react to stresses - particularly threats - by lashing out. Hurting people, breaking things, forcing issues. Not strictly touchier than other capes, but a bit more prone to escalation.
Trumps will usually have a specific type of goal, and will try basically any means available to accomplish it.
Puppeters really want social control, and further context can usually be read from their powers.
Blasters prefer to attack from a distance, physically and metaphorically. May also be disinclined to give warning.
Strikers fight directly, personally, and typically with a lot of force.

Externalizers respond to their trigger by associating an entire class of experience with major stress.
Thinkers have an issue with unanswered questions.
Strangers have an issue with unwelcome attention.
Shapers have an issue with some type of place, object, or process affecting either. (The typical Shaper trigger is having one's possessions or shelter threatened.)
Cloakers have an issue with proximity to something.

(This list has recieved a major rework since posting. This is the previous, less useful list:)

Spoiler

Internalizers responded to major stress by turning themselves into something else.
Changers rework themselves to avoid their problems.
Gifters define themselves by context to whatever they triggered over.
Streamers define themselves by how they're trying to move. (It can be a little abstract.)
Brutes define themselves by their bodies, or aspects thereof.

Dissociators respond to major stress by ignoring, compartmentalizing, focusing on something else. Distracting themselves.
Tinkers distract themselves with engineering, artistry, making or fixing things.
Jackers distract themselves by identifying with something else. Usually something present at the time.
Jumpers distract themselves by physically leaving.
Breakers distract themselves by becoming something else for a time. Usually something unnaturally resilient.

Lashers respond to major stress by lashing out. Hurting people, breaking things, forcing issues. Usually want control of some kind.
Trumps lash out in a frenzied sort of manner, trying anything they can.
Puppeters lash out socially, often with as much force as they can muster.
Blasters lash out physically, and from a distance.
Strikers lash out physically, from up close.

Externalizers respond to major stress by associating it with something.
Thinkers associate stress with unanswered questions.
Strangers associate stress with unwelcome attention.
Shapers associate stress with some manner of place or object.
Cloakers associate stress with proximity to something.

...

Incidentally, I think the Shards are probably missing a few proverbial screws. Too many just make weird drug dealers, too many hosts die quick deaths for how slowly the shards reactivate, and not enough hyperbattles happen. (Zion versus Khepri is the only one that should be more than marginally relevant to fighting other Entities, and if they aren't training to fight other Entities then why are they focusing on combat in the first place?)
Fortunately, there's a simple explanation for this. Zion is braindamaged, and Eden is dead. Side effects have been predictably weird.

 

[Hex123]

I like this, it shows a new way of categorizing powers. I still think that PRT will use their definitions, because there are less of them and are easier to say in combat situations. Another thing to think about is how shards give a monkey's paw power. Sure you have powers, but it doesn't solve it. You may control bugs but you still are bullied and you can't use bugs to stop that.

 

[HoratioVonBecker]

I like this, it shows a new way of categorizing powers. I still think that PRT will use their definitions, because there are less of them and are easier to say in combat situations.

Click to shrink...

Combat shorthand would need to consider a lot of other factors. Things like "makes hostages probable", "should not be foamed", "probably bribeable", and "very difficult to track if they escape". It's a whole different set of considerations.
This is just my ideas for cape psychology. (Which doubles as a fairly robust writing prompt system.)

 

[boo600]

It's an interesting idea, and a way for psychotherapists to make quick assumptions about capes for... hostage negotiations, I guess, since in-detail 1v1 therapy would generally be... well.

It doesn't work for combat (and I'm presuming you're casting Eidolon as a Changer for his mental state, and not his powers), and a vague rating system to add onto already-existing psychological diagnoses doesn't make sense.

As for this...

And I eventually noticed that Brute, Breaker and Striker were basically the same sort of power with different control schemes

Click to shrink...

Um... well, not quite, but I see your point. Brutes are tanks with CQC, strikers are supposedly CQC-only, but one of the strikers we get (Striker 7, Assault) can get at least something of a brute rating from redirecting matter which strikes him. That being said, it's an actively-managed effect used as a shield, not superhuman durability/a 24-7 shield/ultra-regeneration; he's not tougher, he can just use his CQC for defense. As this is for PRT guidelines on how to deal with them, Striker means he's vulnerable to surprise gunfire where a brute would still walk away fine.

And I hate (well, love, but I'm trying to change!) to be pedantic, but... Breaker... no. That's not really the same.

Breaker is for "other form, on-off switch style." And while that CAN lead to CQC, it's pretty different.

Lung is a Changer, who gradually shifts into a form that at least pays lip service to standard physics; it's biological, if with some metal/pyrokinetic resistance/etc. Legend also gradually transforms, but it's still very all-or-nothing, and he turns into light. Wanton turns into a local telekinetic maelstrom.

Grumman is a breaker- he shifts between a move-form and a blaster-form, the way Wanton switches between human-form and maelstrom-form.

Breaker means "this guys power is all or nothing, he may have two permanent breaker states, we don't know or care." It's a warning that this guy's power is weird, that he's likely vulnerable when he shifts out of his form, and it's more than "brute or blaster." Generally, if they have Br/Bl ratings, they'll be notified. It's not "this is how they use it in and out of combat;" Shadow Stalker had Mover and Stranger ratings, and could have had a Blaster or Striker number as well. The point is "we know the central mechanic of their power- it's a binary state."

 

[HoratioVonBecker]

It's an interesting idea, and a way for psychotherapists to make quick assumptions about capes for... hostage negotiations, I guess, since in-detail 1v1 therapy would generally be... well.

Click to shrink...

Mostly, it's for rapidly generating and characterizing new capes; a better structure for the Weaver Dice system. In-universe, it'd probably be re-rendered as a 'things to know if you might need to talk to a cape' course - Feint from PRT Quest, for example, is a textbook Puppeter, and if the Director had read that textbook, he'd have known that a hardline dominance display was exactly the wrong approach.
(Because Puppeters are all about controlling their own social stuff.)

(and I'm presuming you're casting Eidolon as a Changer for his mental state, and not his powers)

Click to shrink...

You're actually wrong in that assumption. Eidolon is a Changer because he can change his entire toolbox - not just which sort of hammer he's using, which is Trumps, but whether his box is full of hammers or crowbars or drills.

Breaker means "this guys power is all or nothing, he may have two permanent breaker states, we don't know or care." It's a warning that this guy's power is weird, that he's likely vulnerable when he shifts out of his form, and it's more than "brute or blaster." Generally, if they have Br/Bl ratings, they'll be notified. It's not "this is how they use it in and out of combat;" Shadow Stalker had Mover and Stranger ratings, and could have had a Blaster or Striker number as well. The point is "we know the central mechanic of their power- it's a binary state."

Click to shrink...

Yeah, I lumped it in because Breaker states always seem to be anchored to the body at least a little, and passive/toggled/triggered made sense as a split.

 

[Rakaziel]

This is really interesting, and insightful. On the other hand you have exceptions like Bakuda, who is behavior wise a Lasher
(granted, her Tinkering has a slant of Puppeteer through brute force and threats, which fits to her Trigger Event)

 

[HoratioVonBecker]

This is really interesting, and insightful. On the other hand you have exceptions like Bakuda, who is behavior wise a Lasher
(granted, her Tinkering has a slant of Puppeteer through brute force and threats, which fits to her Trigger Event)

Click to shrink...

It's been a long time since I read the Bakuda arc, but Bakuda is probably a ...Trump slant? Her bombs have lots and lots of different effects, but when it comes down to it, there really aren't that many roles they fill. Area denial, RPGs, headbombs, and the take-america-hostage megabomb. The first two even seem to have roughly the same areas of effect, with only minor variations.
Also, we mostly see Bakuda on a war footing. Based on how many bombs she had built up, and on her fairly rational behavior during the Canary interlude, I kind of suspect her Tinker side and Trump side behave quite differently - and further, that this sort of thing is common among strongly slanted capes. I'll need to think about that last thing.

 

[Rakaziel]

headbombs, and the take-america-hostage megabomb

Click to shrink...

Those two are what I base my Lasher, subtype Pupeteer hypothesis on. And her taking the entire city hostage with her first bombing campaign.
She has no Master aspect (suggestibility is notably missing from her list of bomb effects) and so instead rules through fear.
True, it manifests as a Tinker, but the bombs she builds are more a means to an end (besides the usual Tinker compulsion) than an end unto themselves (contrast Blasto and Bonesaw, who tinker to Tinker). She does have a Trump aspect with her varied effects but she is not really doing any different things with it, so I would not call it a slant.

 

[HoratioVonBecker]

Those two are what I base my Lasher, subtype Pupeteer hypothesis on. And her taking the entire city hostage with her first bombing campaign.
She has no Master aspect (suggestibility is notably missing from her list of bomb effects) and so instead rules through fear.
True, it manifests as a Tinker, but the bombs she builds are more a means to an end (besides the usual Tinker compulsion) than an end unto themselves (contrast Blasto and Bonesaw, who tinker to Tinker). She does have a Trump aspect with her varied effects but she is not really doing any different things with it, so I would not call it a slant.

Click to shrink...

See, I'd say she has two and a half slants - Trump, Puppeter, and Shaper. She tries to rule by fear and overwhelming firepower, her response to defiance is more types of attack, and the half-slant is her area control stuff. Make sense?