Invisible or Mental Image?

[t-bear]

Got a question for everyone here.

I'm in a campaign where one of the players is a Mentalist. She has an "invisibility power" which the special effect of is that she's mentally conviencing everyone around her that they simply "don't see her".

This is fine and dandy, but wouldn't it make more sense to build it as a mental illusion? I mean, for instance, she's a 200 point Mentalist with a 50 AP limit, there's no way she'd be conviencing Professor X that he couldn't see her.....so if built like a Mental Image it would give those around her who have high ECVs the opportunity to *break out* of the "image".

Thoughts?

[austenandrews]

I'd add a Limitation that a disbeliever could "break free" of the effect using the same mechanic as Mental Illusions. But I'd make disbelief require active resistance, not passive. Ultimately it's just a special effect of Invisibility, which shouldn't require the tons of dice-rolling necessary for Mental Illusions.

-AA

[Magmarock]

I ran a Mentalist that had Invisibility built this way.

She made ONE attack roll (and one effects roll) for any given situation that she used it in and the GM applied that to the targets (anyone who would normally see her should she not be invisible). Mental Defense made it even harder for my PC to hide from people, but it could be done with a good enough roll. Also, this was in 4th Ed before there were classifications, so she had the LIM: Only vs. Living Beings.

If I made a lousy roll, I could always try again, but then it took another action. There was always the possibility of someone noticing my PC fading in and out, too. What a hoot!

It worked out ok for us.

One of the nice things about the Hero System, you can usually build any power in multiple ways. It says in the book that if a power can be built two ways, the most expensive way is the correct way... but that is not always the case.

Mags

[AnotherSkip]

Im not sure i agree with the "most expensive= the best way" rule.

Personally I agree with the "if there are two equally valid ways to build something then choose the more expensive way."

i see mental illusions as being not equal to invisibility.

sure it can pull it off in a pinch. but mental illusions is much more versatile and less effective.

[Vondy]

I would purchase this as invisibility and a limitation (not versus targets with no ECV score ("machines, etc.")). The point about not fooling "Prof X" is a good one. Since the SFX of the invisibility is that its mental I would assume its visible to the mental sense group at a -0 limitation. I would determine whether or not Professor X caught them at it based on a mental sense roll (perhaps they can by mental stealth as an opposing skill roll). Once he's on to them he could make a simple ECV attack to "lock on" as it were.

I don't agree the most expensive way is always the method that should be used. Often times the cheaper way will fit the SFX more accurately, or be more elegant in design. In those latter cases I say go cheaper.

[noumena]

I also played a mentalist with a power like this. In my version, I simply bought invisibility with Only vs. minds (-1/2).

Though it worked reasonably well in our game, it does seem plausible that someone with mental defense might not be fooled. Perhaps you could play with the "fringe" rule for invisibility -- 1" of fringe per 2 pts of mental defense sounds reasonable off the top of my head.

[Starflame]

I built a character with this power once.
I brought a invisible darkness area of effect.
Special effect defined as those in the field could see
but could not see me.
Those outside the feild could see everyone.
I played a different character in the game
so I never found out how this worked.