 November 17, 2014 - 5:19am | I'm no psychologist but I do play one in a role playing game... but it seems to me that someone like the Malthar, who takes his security so seriously that he employs hundreds of killer robots has trust issues. I'd be willing to bet that all the robots have a death function that reads something like "in the event of the Malthar's death kill everyone" So just how far would the Malthar go with that? would he hide a nuke on Dark World station? If the Malthar dies, the nuke blows? Curiosity is killing this Tom Cat because I think it might be an interesting game scenario where the PCs discover this little fact and must foil an assassination attempt on the Malthar to prevent the whole station from blowing (especially if they're on it). I might not be a dralasite, vrusk or yazirian but I do play one in Star Frontiers! |
 November 17, 2014 - 8:28am | He's a slippery sly crime lord. He doesn't die, he escapes to resurface later and torment his oppressors. The hundreds of robots and guards merely serve to keep others busy while he makes good on that escape. |
 November 17, 2014 - 7:09pm | Well it depends on if he is afraid and so uses fear on others as an extension of his fear as this is all he understands as a way to control his environment or if it is all about tactics with him, calculated manipulation. In other words "If you kill me I kill you" is a tactic or a personalty trait. A person afraid of death at all costs will never mean to die themselves but might choose such a revenge tactic or statement as a bluff motivator towards others. A person who is practical about the fact someone might be trying to kill them, might say that as a bluff, might set up revenge but will always be realistic that their activities are dangerous. In other words any robot army is a precaution but they are still going to move with confidence (not actually afraid). One personalty is acting out of fear of loss of life & limb the other is calculating risks, okay with danger and loss as long as results are achieved. So one uses many tactics vs just the one tactic. I think Malthar is a long term planner, a multiple tactic guy, realistic but likes the danger (despite the robots)... big difference from micromanaging everyone with fear for short term gains and out of cowardice. I personally have dealt with a lot of folks who try and use fear to try and control their environment (and people) because they are afraid themselves, they think if everyone is afraid of them they are safe, they think if they are armed they have an edge (are safe), they think threats scare others to do their bidding, they think inflicting pain on others will get them their way, and they are very wrong that all people think from a fear base as they do. Some people just like the high they get from the fear they inflict on others too, but in my experience they usually fear death greatly are cowards at heart (dangerous cowards but cowards none the less) as the only power they have in life is what people give them through fear. So yes he might do it, but his motivation for mutually assured destruction would be because he thought it necessary to motivate others not to interfere in his plans or to destroy evidence of his activities or some other motivator versus just scarring the hell out of people. A person who enjoys scarring others would have trouble keeping the bomb secret... they want to see others afraid. One personality is cold and calculating versus emotional driven. Anyhow he can't die... that was his high paid double!  "Never fire a laser at a mirror." |
November 18, 2014 - 12:03pm | they think if they are armed they have an edge (are safe),
I'm armed because I am both too young to die and too old to get my ass kicked. |
November 18, 2014 - 2:56pm | I want to clarify I am okay with being armed & taking needed precautions. So simply having a weapon or a robot army does not mean you are fearful. I am specifically addressing the personalty type that wants others to fear/respect them (& only understand respect as fear) via a weapon. In my experience weapons should be used with great caution & restraint, never drawn on others unless you are going to use them. For example there is a difference between wanting one's co-workers to cower in fear becuase you are armed, versus being armed to keep your co-workers safe. One is a desire to have power and exercise power, the other is a precaution for your safety & your co-workers safety. In both examples an employee is armed but their motives for having the weapon will affect their behavior.  The psychology of it... "Never fire a laser at a mirror." |
