First-time GM seeks experienced GM for companionship and advice

I’ve had to think about this regarding a campaign I’m writing as well. Like you, my intention is to just drop the players into the game cold, with absolutely no background at all. I’m so committed to this that I don’t intend to allow any players to the use the 2nd edition character sheet at first simply because it has the word “magick” on the 1st page. My personal opinion is that you shouldn’t do anything during character creation. I think the main problem is coming up with strategies for integrating the player’s initial obsession choices into the playing of the game itself.

In my opinion, the easiest answer to this is “Avatars”. They’re far more common than adepts. Regarding your book related example, the obsession could naturally lend itself to the The Scholar (Statosphere), for instance. Archetypes are actually extremely flexible and an open ended due to the fact that the character’s obsession doesn’t even have to align with an Archetype. The character just has to “walk the walk” and they can become an avatar. You could be even be devious and decide to assign a character an archetype without fully explaining it to the character. Make up a mysterious name or catchphrase for the new avatar skill the character suddenly discovers that he/she has (e.g. “Hear Ennio Morricone Music In Your Head” for The Masterless Man) and just have the channels mysteriously begin the manifest and provide some vague feedback regarding taboo violations. This would also correspond with the idea that many people are unconscious avatars.

Another option is to allow characters to start without an obsession. The book describes this as rare, but I think it makes sense as an option in a street level campaign. Allow the PC the choose an obsession during the course of play and rationalize it as a latent predisposition towards the obsessive behavior that emerges as a result of experiences during play. It’s admittedly a bit of a “kludge”, but strikes me as desirable when playing with a group of PCs who start out with absolutely no knowledge of the Occult Underground.

Along these same lines, you could encourage your players to describe their obsession in vague enough terms that mapping/translating them into a school later presents little challenge. To use an example of a mundane obsession in UA2, “Knowing It All” could easily develop into Western Cryptomancy (PoMoMa), Bibliomancy, or even Cliomancy. I think there’s also a strong case to be made for allowing players to organically develop their own adept school, however. It certainly has a stiff perquisite (5 Failed notches in Self), but has the potential to add a lot of a unique character to your game.

(3000 character limit. 😉

I’m stretching it here a bit, but it might work. Given everything above, the 332nd Archetype is “The Broken Man”. Or the “Hanged Man” of the Tarot. He is the one that realizes that culture has run its course and has been become fully automated and “cliched” or “archetyped” to the point that human culture has essentially become a skipping record, infinitely repeating the same last groove. The idea would be to use globalization as a metaphor of the human template, erasing all individual aspects of culture. The front is just “The Anti-Christ” archetype. Simply because he’s the only one who realizes it. Enter moral dilemma. Do the PCs “Save The World” by taking him out, or do they “Save The World” by allowing his ascension? And thereby tacitly enabling a complete reboot of the human experience. Sounds UA to me. Inset Nanobots where ever they fit, just make sure they conform to Mechanomancy.