"Direct" Telekinesis

**Lord Liaden** · Jul 8th, '03, 10:11 PM

I'd appreciate some perspectives on this one, folks: FREd states that Telekinesis is inherently Indirect "in some ways." From the description on p. 147 it would appear to have all the benefits of Fully Indirect in the base Power, and under questioning Steve Long couldn't come up with any additional benefit to adding an Indirect Advantage to it. All right, that's clear enough.

Well, what if that's not what I want? Suppose I want the mechanics of TK - being able to lift, grab, squeeze and throw at range - but I want the effect to emanate directly from the character, attack the target from the front, be blocked by intervening barriers, etc. I'm thinking of something like a telescoping mechanical arm, or the classic Green Lantern effect in which his various energy constructs would be at the end of straight green rays emanating from his power ring.

A Limitation on Telekinesis would seem logical, but what value should it be? Fully Indirect would be a +3/4 Advantage, but reversing its lack into a -3/4 Limitation seems like a big cost break since it's an ability of the base Power rather than something added on. Or maybe not; I'm unsure as to how limiting this would be.

BTW, I can see that this effect could be achieved via Stretching with some extra Strength Linked to it, but that construct would be a little awkward to put into a Power Framework. I'd prefer something a bit cleaner.

So, if anyone would care to contribute an opinion or evaluation, I'd appreciate it.

**Kristopher** · Jul 8th, '03, 10:35 PM

How often does the "partially indirect" nature of TK come into play, and benefit the character?

My first instinct would be -1/2.

**Killer Shrike** · Jul 8th, '03, 10:35 PM

Well, really if you get rid of the Indirect portion of TK, its just Ranged Strength. Obviously that doesnt work out, and -3/4 is too much of a lim for something thats basically worked into a Powers Base cost. Maybe just a -1/4 flavor limitation similar to the Stretching Lim dealing with non-indirect.

**Gary** · Jul 8th, '03, 10:41 PM

I'd say -1/4 normally. It'd be -1/2 if it could be missile deflected as well.

**Crimson Arrow** · Jul 8th, '03, 11:41 PM

It's definitely either -1/4 or -1/2. Killer Shrike's argument is a good one, although I don't think Stretching is as inherently Indirect as TK. I think -1/2 is still probably too much, but it might depend on the campaign. Gary's suggestion is interesting. I think it would work quite well.

My problem would be simulating the Green Lantern effect. The TK is not fully Direct, as GLs regularly bend the ray round behind things, but they wouldn't be able to automatically effect something within, say, a force sphere. That's probably too small a Limitation to merit anything other than a -0.

**Killer Shrike** · Jul 8th, '03, 11:53 PM

Home from work and have book.

Always Direct (-1/4) page 142 seems appropriate.

**Lord Liaden** · Jul 9th, '03, 11:01 AM

Originally posted by Killer Shrike
Home from work and have book.

Always Direct (-1/4) page 142 seems appropriate.

Thanks for the reference, KS. That Lim is for Stretching, of course, but I can see why you would apply it to Telekinesis.

Thing is, the two Powers are not wholly analogous in the degree to which they are Indirect. Stretching does not appear to be able to pass through solid barriers or into enclosed spaces as a default; I think that's implied by the additional "Does Not Cross Intervening Space" Advantage (+1/4). Given that, I'd be more inclined to set an "Always Direct" Limitation at -1/2.

Actually, now that I think on it, I'd probably be more comfortable with a house rule making the default Indirect ability of TK comparable to that of Stretching: reaching over or around barriers or people, but not through them. I've long felt that the current 5E TK is a little too versatile for its points. I'd then be justified in using "Does Not Cross..." to make the Power fully Indirect, or using the "Always Direct" Lim, at the same values listed for Stretching. Makes everything simpler and more consistent.

Thank you for the input, everyone. Feel free to continue to discuss this - you can never have too many great minds at work on a problem.

**Killer Shrike** · Jul 9th, '03, 11:06 AM

Originally posted by Lord Liaden
Actually, now that I think on it, I'd probably be more comfortable with a house rule making the default Indirect ability of TK comparable to that of Stretching: reaching over or around barriers or people, but not through them. I've long felt that the current 5E TK is a little too versatile for its points. I'd then be justified in using "Does Not Cross..." to make the Power fully Indirect, or using the "Always Direct" Lim, at the same values listed for Stretching. Makes everything simpler and more consistent.

I concur. Ill be formally implementing that houserule as well.

**Kristopher** · Jul 9th, '03, 11:10 AM

Originally posted by Lord Liaden
Thanks for the reference, KS. That Lim is for Stretching, of course, but I can see why you would apply it to Telekinesis.

Thing is, the two Powers are not wholly analogous in the degree to which they are Indirect. Stretching does not appear to be able to pass through solid barriers or into enclosed spaces as a default; I think that's implied by the additional "Does Not Cross Intervening Space" Advantage (+1/4). Given that, I'd be more inclined to set an "Always Direct" Limitation at -1/2.

Actually, now that I think on it, I'd probably be more comfortable with a house rule making the default Indirect ability of TK comparable to that of Stretching: reaching over or around barriers or people, but not through them. I've long felt that the current 5E TK is a little too versatile for its points. I'd then be justified in using "Does Not Cross..." to make the Power fully Indirect, or using the "Always Direct" Lim, at the same values listed for Stretching. Makes everything simpler and more consistent.

Thank you for the input, everyone. Feel free to continue to discuss this - you can never have too many great minds at work on a problem.

Test Case:

The telekinetic can see something through a sealed window. Can he use his TK on that object?

**Lord Liaden** · Jul 9th, '03, 11:24 AM

Originally posted by Kristopher
Test Case:

The telekinetic can see something through a sealed window. Can he use his TK on that object?

Under the 5E rules, he could use TK on that object without damaging the window - that's an explicit example from the description of Telekinesis in FREd.

Under my proposed house rule, not unless he broke through the window first, or bought the "Does Not Cross Intervening Space" Advantage at +1/4. Once he could get at the object, though, he could still use all the other abilities of TK, including attacking the object from behind; he'd just be reaching around it.

Note that the same would apply if the character had a special sense allowing him to see through solid, opaque barriers and objects.

**Kristopher** · Jul 9th, '03, 11:29 AM

Originally posted by Lord Liaden
Under the 5E rules, he could use TK on that object without damaging the window - that's an explicit example from the description of Telekinesis in FREd.

Under my proposed house rule, not unless he broke through the window first, or bought the "Does Not Cross Intervening Space" Advantage at +1/4. Once he could get at the object, though, he could still use all the other abilities of TK, including attacking the object from behind; he'd just be reaching around it.

IMO, TK is already expensive enough for what it does. IMO.