Mental Powers

[Fox1]

Re: Mental Powers

 

Now' date=' your list expands "human class minds" to likely allow both those examples. So, the end result is that we get a group of characters (let's say Slug and his minions, falling into the last camp) which gets a default "invulnerability to standard mental powers" power for free.[/quote']

 

I don't have a problem with that as they are NPCs and we already have a NPC only class of things in the game immune to mental powers- automations.

 

Mental Powers have a number of advantages and are the only way in the game to achieve certain effects. Thus I consider the limits given as nothing more than a way of preventing them from costing more than they do.

 

 

 

 

 

Does 5e Slug have mental powers? Did he buy the "human class" adders?

 

Beats me. I don't buy CU products, nor do I care about them. They aren't the game I run.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Mental Powers

 

I think you're looking at it from the wrong PoV.

 

Don't consider it equal points for equal ability.

 

12d6 Mind Control vs Human-class minds = 60 points

12d6 Mind Control vs Alien-class minds = 60 points

12d6 Mind Control vs Animal-class minds = 60 points.

12d6 Mind Control vs Machine-class minds = 60 points.

 

Those appear, to me, to be equal points. Equal points should be, more or less, equal ability. However, I do not see the above four abilities being equally valuable in the typical game. Which one(s) are of greater or lesser value depends largely on setting and genre.

 

The suggestion of spending extra points to affect extra targets doesn't work if BeastMaster only controls animals, not humans. He pays the same amount to affect the occasional animal in an urban supers game as PersuasionLass pays to affect all human-class minds, being 95%+ of her opposition.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Mental Powers

 

I don't have a problem with that as they are NPCs and we already have a NPC only class of things in the game immune to mental powers- automations.

 

I consider that a function of lacking any free will by virtue of having no Ego score. I wouldn't let a player run a brick wall, a tree or an automobile either. The fact that mental powers don't affect things with no mind doesn't bother me - energy blasts don't help you get frpom "point A" to "point B" either.

 

To say that, by act of background, a free-willed character can be immune to a significant subset of powers in the game, oh, but not if he's a player character, is a rule set I find considerably less satisfactory.

 

From that angle, I like MitchellS' system much better. The further the mind gets from your own, the harder it is to "connect" with it, and the harder it is for the opponent to connect wioth your mind.. You want to affect other minds easier? Use (penalty) skill levels. Whether the penalties are high enough is a matter of taste, but that's easily adjusted. It's still an arbitrary bonus between certain types of characters, but doesn't give an automatic invulnerability to one archetype solely based on background.

[Fox1]

Re: Mental Powers

 

Those appear' date=' to me, to be equal points. Equal points should be, more or less, equal ability..[/quote']

 

First, I think the concepts of the points actually being 'balance' or worth anything other than a simple meta-mechanical 'budget' is flawed to begin with. HERO is not balanced. GURPS is not balanced. No game is balance nor can any game be balanced if they are based upon a wide range point system.

 

 

Second, equal points does not mean equal ability. Equal points means equal value. If you have to switch genres to find that equal value, so be it- HERO never claimed that everything it offers is suitable for use in ever case. If you don't feel like your getting proper value for Mental Powers- animals, don't take it.

 

For my game however, I assure you that it works great as is. No balance problems, and no players with any worries about their abilities at all.

 

 

The suggestion of spending extra points to affect extra targets doesn't work if BeastMaster only controls animals, not humans. He pays the same amount to affect the occasional animal in an urban supers game as PersuasionLass pays to affect all human-class minds, being 95%+ of her opposition.

 

Your animal constructions are very strange then. Looking through mine I note that very few animals indeed have EGOs that match the typical human target for a mentalist. In my world, a Beastmaster would have equal effect for significantly less points.

 

In addition the very fact that the Hero could speak to animals gives him options unknown to the traditional human mentalist. For but one example- a robber may well pick a time and place where there are no human witnesses to be had. After all, he expects that problem and has made it his job to avoid it. But the local alley cat saw it all, or the blackbirds with the nearby nest.

 

In short if you see a problem with a Mind Class breakdown such as I use- it is indeed very likely because YOU made it a problem in how you approached it. Not because the problem is mechanical existent.

[Fox1]

Re: Mental Powers

 

I consider that a function of lacking any free will by virtue of having no Ego score. .

 

By definition in my campaign, the "Things man was not meant to know" do in fact lack free well. That's one of the reasons they can't be a player character.

 

From that angle, I like MitchellS' system much better.

 

His method isn't suitable for the either the genre or the construction methods (where his modifiers are insignificant given that typically a mentalist starts with a weightly CV advantage over most targets) of my campaigns.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Mental Powers

 

First' date=' I think the concepts of the points actually being 'balance' or worth anything other than a simple meta-mechanical 'budget' is flawed to begin with. HERO is not balanced. GURPS is not balanced. No game is balance nor can any game be balanced if they are based upon a wide range point system.[/quote']

 

They are a starting point. No one would suggest it woulde be appropriate for

+3 DEX to cost more than a skill level which raises either DCV or OCV, for example. Perfect balance will never be achieved with points, but where two powers cost equal points, it seems reasonable to assert they should also carry equal value.

 

Equal points means equal value. If you have to switch genres to find that equal value' date=' so be it- HERO never claimed that everything it offers is suitable for use in ever case. If you don't feel like your getting proper value for Mental Powers- animals, don't take it.[/quote']

 

So if you aren't getting equal value, the solution is "don't play that character"? In my view, it's "price the ability in accordance with its value". Of course. I view "only against animals" as more limiting that "only against humanoids" in most games, so I believe powers that work only against animals should take less of the player's/character's points. In a setting where animal encounters are roughly as common as human encounters, both are equally limiting, anmd the value of the limitations would be adjusted accordingly. "Classes of Minds" allows for no such ready adjustment.

 

Your animal constructions are very strange then. Looking through mine I note that very few animals indeed have EGOs that match the typical human target for a mentalist. In my world' date=' a Beastmaster would have equal effect for significantly less points.[/quote']

 

The typical human has an 8 Ego. Most animals are in the range of 5 to 8. Even if we assume typical adversary humans have a 15 to 18 Ego (being better than them), we're talking 3 or 4 more dice to be equivalent. Compare this to how common and useful humans vs animals are in the typical setting, and I still see a clear advantage to the guy whose mental powers affect humans.

 

And let's not get started on "alien minds" - equal or superior ego, and far less common than animals or humans.

 

In addition the very fact that the Hero could speak to animals gives him options unknown to the traditional human mentalist. For but one example- a robber may well pick a time and place where there are no human witnesses to be had. After all' date=' he expects that problem and has made it his job to avoid it. But the local alley cat saw it all, or the blackbirds with the nearby nest.[/quote']

 

Yes, there are some things mental powers which affect animals can achieve which mental powers afecting only humans cannot. However, the things which can be done with mental attacks affecting humans, not animals, are also numerous, and the frequency of animals vs humans in most settings provides a further disincentive.

 

In short if you see a problem with a Mind Class breakdown such as I use- it is indeed very likely because YOU made it a problem in how you approached it. Not because the problem is mechanical existent.

 

By the way, am I misrecalling, or isn't your game "no points", such that the cost of powers has no real impact anyway, in which case a menatlist whose powers affect all classes of minds really doesn't give up anything comp[ared to one who affects only one class of minds.

 

"You can do whatever you want" basically eliminates any concern of balancing points, since it doesn't matter whether something is vastly overpriced.

[Fox1]

Re: Mental Powers

 

Perfect balance will never be achieved with points' date=' but where two powers cost equal points, it seems reasonable to assert they should also carry equal value. [/quote']

 

No, I'm afraid it isn't.

 

 

 

So if you aren't getting equal value, the solution is "don't play that character"?

 

If you aren't getting equal value, it's because the campaign/GM will not allow you equal value. Either play something else, or find a different 'seller'.

 

Someone playing in my campaign would get their worth by paying the 10 point or selecting a different class (animal or machine for example). I'm sorry they don't in yours.

 

 

 

The typical human has an 8 Ego.

 

Not in my game. I'm old school and consider the typical stat for a human in good condition to be a 10. My cops for example don't lack the STR needed to fire their weapons.

 

Nor are average humans the typical target for mentalists anywhere near the rate that typical animals would be.

 

we're talking 3 or 4 more dice to be equivalent.

 

That's 15-20 points. More actually with the very common in my came 1/4 End cost advantage: 19-25.

 

I call that highly a significant reduction in cost, at least in my games where the cost matters (typically 125 point characters or less). It's significant for every standard campaigns where it's equal to a -1/2 limit assuming a 75 AP power.

 

 

However, the things which can be done with mental attacks affecting humans, not animals, are also numerous, and the frequency of animals vs humans in most settings provides a further disincentive.

 

You have an odd world. I can look outside my window and see more animals than people and I live in Dallas.

 

Anything based on anything like the 'real earth' will have that ratio.

 

 

 

 

By the way, am I misrecalling, or isn't your game "no points", such that the cost of powers has no real impact anyway, in which case a menatlist whose powers affect all classes of minds really doesn't give up anything comp[ared to one who affects only one class of minds.

 

"You can do whatever you want" basically eliminates any concern of balancing points, since it doesn't matter whether something is vastly overpriced.

 

My 'full' superhero campaign is unlimited points true. And given that I don't see balance problems with characters ranging from 400-1000 playing together, I've learned that the points are meaningless for balance. If you have balance problems, it's because YOU created the problems yourself, either in how you constructed the characters (not respecting niche typically) or how you run your game.

 

However for reference I run a number of campaigns that do have point limits that function a 'budget': X-Students (100 plus 100 disads), Morrow Project SF (125 + 100 disads), Shadowrun (125 + 100 disads).

 

All the above have seen up to 150 or even 200 XP being earned and spent.

 

Again, no balance problems have ever appeared.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Mental Powers

 

Someone playing in my campaign would get their worth by paying the 10 point or selecting a different class (animal or machine for example). I'm sorry they don't in yours.

 

The proof is, oif course, always in the pudding. So what % of mental powers paid for (in points) by player characters in your games use one of the other mental classes as the default (not just shell out 10 points to affect a second class, but cannot affect the human class of minds)?

 

Not in my game. I'm old school and consider the typical stat for a human in good condition to be a 10. My cops for example don't lack the STR needed to fire their weapons.

 

Cops are subject to physical restrictions on hiring and receive physical training. I'd expect them to have higher than average physical stats. Be that as it may, an extra 2 points of Ego makes minimnal difference to the comparison.

 

Nor are average humans the typical target for mentalists anywhere near the rate that typical animals would be.

 

Nor is the ability to Mind Control a stray cat of equal utility to the ability to Mind Control a typical supervillain adversary.

 

That's 15-20 points. More actually with the very common in my came 1/4 End cost advantage: 19-25.

 

I call that highly a significant reduction in cost, at least in my games where the cost matters (typically 125 point characters or less). It's significant for every standard campaigns where it's equal to a -1/2 limit assuming a 75 AP power.

 

I could see -1/2 for "only affecting animals" being a reasonable, if not low end, limitation. The ability to Mind Control cats and dogs doesn't provide near the options the ability to Mind Conrol Joe Average does, much less the utility of being able to Mind Control a typical adversary.

 

You have an odd world. I can look outside my window and see more animals than people and I live in Dallas.

 

Anything based on anything like the 'real earth' will have that ratio.

 

The fact there are lots around doesn't make them "frequently useful". If it did, Hank Pym would never have left the Ant Man suit behind - his millions of allies would surely carry the day!

 

For that matter, there are hugely more normal humans than super-adversaries, yet above you indicate that true comparability between animals and humans require we consider not the spread between "animal average" and "human average", but the spread between "animal average" and "PC-class human".

 

As far as arbitrariness of the system goes, by the way, do you really think "Human Mind" and "Chimp Mind" have less in common than "Chimp Mind" and "Mosquito Mind"?

 

My 'full' superhero campaign is unlimited points true. And given that I don't see balance problems with characters ranging from 400-1000 playing together' date=' I've learned that the points are meaningless for balance.[/quote']

 

Actually, it proves that poits are not essential for balancing. It does not prove they are meaningless. If, in fact, they were meaningless, why would you use them in your lower powered games?

[Fox1]

Re: Mental Powers

 

The proof is' date=' oif course, always in the pudding. So what % of mental powers paid for (in points) by player characters in your games use one of the other mental classes as the default (not just shell out 10 points to affect a second class, but cannot affect the human class of minds)??[/quote']

 

It's actually rather evenly split.

 

I know from experience in play that you're wrong. I've ran it just fine. If you're having a problem- it's your problem. Correct it for YOUR game however you will.

 

Me, I'm done with this rather pointless exchange.

[Dust Raven]

Re: Mental Powers

 

OK, my experience is principally Champions and some Fantasy. However, my take is that there are a lot of genres where mental powers aren't used much, if at all. Considering the ones where they are:

 

Champions/Supers: Generally, mentalists can affect pretty much everyone. Those so unusual they can't should pay the points for the defense - they're pretty rare. A character immune to fire has to pay for it, so why not a character immune to mental attacks?

Agreed, this is one of the genres where the class of mind rules don't work quite right and need to be altered abit, although you could just leave them and the game shouldn't suffer.

 

Pulp and Fantasy: Dissimialr genres, except that both tend to have powers loaded down with limitations. "Only normal animals" or "only humans" seems just one more limit in a large field, in such genres.

For Pulp games, there are rarely, if ever, aliens or machines such powers would apply to. Everyone's human, so it doesn't make any difference.

 

For a Fantasy game, Human becomes Humanoid, and then you'd need an adder for animals and the various "alien" types, such as Dragons, Angels, Demons and various completely inhuman creatures that are completely inhuman(oid). These could all be dumped together, or seperated how the GM chooses, but classes of mind still works, especially when you involve animals.

 

Horror: Here, I can see a case being made, in those subgenres where PC's have psychic powers. The "lots of limits" argument could again be applied. More to the point, however, Horror doesn't consistently apply a "classes of mind" rule. Often, the power has its effect (or is reduced in effect, or blocked because the enemy has a powerful defense), but the character using the power is adversely affected (ie a damage aura). This is at least as common as "It's not working - its mind is too alien".

Horror is one of the funky genres that need a number of house rules and campaign guidelines to work properly. Horror films and books do have a lot in common, but rarely to they have "how the supernatural works" in common.

 

Sci Fi: This is the tough one for me, especially as it's the example you single out positively, as I don't play much sci fi. But, looking at mainstream sci fi, I see:

 

Not that tough... Most of the "aliens" seen in such shows are all humanoid, humanlike and mamallian. So technically they all follow the rules. I've never seen a Jedi perform a mind trick on a droid or on one of the bug-termite people... so maybe this is true, and that Watto really is something other than a mammalian alien. In Star Trek specifically, it's pointed out in NextGen that all of the intelligent races are spawned from the same original DNA, which could explain why mental powers don't have any problems working between the races.

 

Overall, classes of minds reminds me a lot of the old Fantasy Hero's magic system - best presented as a campaign specific structure, or an option, and not as the default mechanic for all settings. Obviously, your views vary, and either way we can both game the way we want (I remove the default, or you add the option). However, I find this default imposes an inappropriate default restriction inconsistent with the usual "toolbox" approach and, as such, would best be an optional rule, ideally presented in a package of options for dealing with different types of minds (ECV penalties; moving effects up the charts; reduced effect rather than all or nothing; likely some I haven't considered; with the adders negating the ill effects).

I'll take that. Then again, being able to buy superpowers is the default for all genres as well... we all know that that's not appropriate, but no one seems to have a problem with it when playing Lethal Weapon Hero or Jungles of Viatnam Hero.

 

 

 

How do you cost out a perk or talent which basically makes a character immune to a field of attacks? I guess we need to start with 3/4 Damage Reduction, all mental powers, not vs. powers that affect Alien class minds, which now needs to be costed higher because it confers complete invulnerability, not 3/4. Pretty expensive talent that's looking to be, which is why I don't see "costing" it as free to an NPC as appropriate.

For Champions, I've just added a house rule that says that there are no absolute barriers between the classes of minds. So long as the target has an EGO, you can attempt the power on them. For classes other than your own (or the class the power works against), the targets gets an automatic amount of Mental Defense. The Talent characters can buy is based on the cost of that Limited Mental Defnese.

 

It would, as you say, be more balanced if each class was represented with similar frequency. At that point, however, the adders pretty much become mandatory to have a general use power, so we get 12d6 Energy Blast for 60 points, or 3d6 Ego Blast (after spending 30 on adders). I don't find mentalists overpowered to the extent they need such a downgrade. YMMV.

They become mandatory to have absolute, or near absolute, application. There are lots of other factors as well, such as when Mind Scan that only works on humans is used to find the captives held by the Xain'te, an insectile race which don't have minds the psychic can sense, and therefore don't interfere with her finding the captives. No target, no barrier.

[Dust Raven]

Re: Mental Powers

 

12d6 Mind Control vs Human-class minds = 60 points

12d6 Mind Control vs Alien-class minds = 60 points

12d6 Mind Control vs Animal-class minds = 60 points.

12d6 Mind Control vs Machine-class minds = 60 points.

 

Those appear, to me, to be equal points. Equal points should be, more or less, equal ability. However, I do not see the above four abilities being equally valuable in the typical game. Which one(s) are of greater or lesser value depends largely on setting and genre.

 

The suggestion of spending extra points to affect extra targets doesn't work if BeastMaster only controls animals, not humans. He pays the same amount to affect the occasional animal in an urban supers game as PersuasionLass pays to affect all human-class minds, being 95%+ of her opposition.

 

I think you need to walk out of the genre museum for a moment . This is the Hero System, and not everything is equal everywhere. You can't tell me that in a Anime Style Ninja Hero game set in feudal Japan, Acrobatics (3 points) and KS: Mating Habbits of the North American Squirrel (12-; 3 poins) are going to have the same value and use, despite the point cost. The same goes for mental powers certain classes of mind. So you're playing in a Pirates on the High Seas game, the only things you'll find anywhere are humans and animals. Naturally buying a mental power that affects aliens and machines will be stupid. You just don't buy it in those games... much easier than complaining that it's there as an option.

[prestidigitator]

Re: Mental Powers

 

I think you need to walk out of the genre museum for a moment . This is the Hero System' date=' and not everything is equal everywhere. You can't tell me that in a Anime Style Ninja Hero game set in feudal Japan, Acrobatics (3 points) and KS: Mating Habbits of the North American Squirrel (12-; 3 poins) are going to have the same value and use, despite the point cost. The same goes for mental powers certain classes of mind. So you're playing in a Pirates on the High Seas game, the only things you'll find anywhere are humans and animals. Naturally buying a mental power that affects aliens and machines will be stupid. You just don't buy it in those games... much easier than complaining that it's there as an option.[/quote']

Another small point: unless you are playing in a game where using Mental Powers on animals is likely to be very useful (like maybe a fantasy genre with powerful fantastic beasts), affecting your average animal is probably going to be a lot easier (lower Ego and no Mental Defense) than affecting your average NPC villain. In that case, you aren't going to be spending nearly so many points on a Mental Power to affect animals. So where is the problem?

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Mental Powers

 

Another small point: unless you are playing in a game where using Mental Powers on animals is likely to be very useful (like maybe a fantasy genre with powerful fantastic beasts)' date=' affecting your average animal is [i']probably[/i] going to be a lot easier (lower Ego and no Mental Defense) than affecting your average NPC villain. In that case, you aren't going to be spending nearly so many points on a Mental Power to affect animals. So where is the problem?

 

I don't see use of mental powers against aniumals being very comparable in utility to being able to use them against humans, much less reliably against your average NPC villain. Let's say we have two mentalists. One can affect human-class minds only (HC). The other only affects animal class minds (AC).

 

HC spends 60 points to have 12d6 Mind Control, Human Class minds. He can expect to get a +20 effect on the typical NPC super (up to about 20 Ego; he averages 42).

 

AC only needs an effect roll of about 30 to reliably get 5-8 Ego animals, so he buys 9d6 (average 31.5). So far, AC has saved 15 points.

 

But wait - HC can deliver his commands verbally, but AC doesn't speak "dog". So AC needs telepathic commands, or a Telepathy poewer enabling him to reliably communicate with animals. Telepathic Commands will add 11 points to his Mind Control, and only allows commands. So he really needs about 4d6 Telepathy, Animals only (-0 - that's just class of minds), only to communicate (likely about -1/2), and some variant of Always ON so he doesn't have to blow a phase to establish communication, as well as a phase to establish control.

 

AC isn't really saving a lot of points, is he? Now, how versatile is his power. It's not much use if he needs to, say, persuade that Briock to stop pounding on his teammate for a phase or two, or affect a desolid villain (mental powers normaly work, but not if you don't affect a human-class mind).

 

Of course, there are advantages to powers that affect animals ("hey, guys - this stray dog saw the whole thing"). Of course, there are some drawbacks as well ("He saw it in B&W, so he can't give us much description, but all we need to do is find a guy who smells like cheese and we've got our man!")

 

Leaving aside issues of point utility (and if you think animals are fun, try statting out the difference between HC and Alien Controller - where aliens probably have as much, or more, Ego/mental defense and are far rarer), as set out above, I think "classes of mind" are not even genre staples, but sub-genre or campaign staples.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Mental Powers

 

The same goes for mental powers certain classes of mind. So you're playing in a Pirates on the High Seas game' date=' the only things you'll find anywhere are humans and animals. Naturally buying a mental power that affects aliens and machines will be stupid. You just don't buy it in those games... much easier than complaining that it's there as an option.[/quote']

 

Let's take that Pirates game and add in Magic, so that mental powers become viable, at least. Presumably, the limitation for "Requires large quantities of water" for my Summon Water Elementals spell will be set at a pretty low level, since the ocean will normally be in the area.

 

However, if I change "Pirates" to "Lawrence of Arabia", and set the campaign in a desert, the limitation should be considerably greater for that game. A globetrotting campaign will set the limitation somewhere between these two extremes.

 

Yet the system, removes this judgement for Mental Powers that only affect certain classes of minds. Affecting, say, "Only Aliens" is of equal value whether we're polaying a Supers game where we encounter Alien-Class minds (say) every 20 adventures or less carries the same value as in a Sci Fi campaign that focuses on War Against the Aliens. To me, the value of that limitation varies considerably bgetween games, and so the value should be set individually fo0r the games, not incorporated as a default in the (supposedly SFX neutral) game rules.

[Lord Zod]

Re: Mental Powers

 

It makes logical sense that a person who can survive in the Sun would not be affected by Blowtorch's flamethrower. Yet the life support purchased by that character affords him no defense form Blowtorch's flamethrower.

 

It makes game sense that characters who want an ability which provides them with an advantage over other characters pay p[oints for the privilege. The ability to survive in the sun required purchase of life support, not merely definition of the character as "dwelling in the sun".

 

Sorry to get off topic but this is an issue that has sparked a lot more debate in my group than the Mental powers issue ever has. Reading the tempertature level rules in the environment section of the book, you would think that a camel needs Safe environment Extreme Heat. Can a camel survive in a volcano or on the sun? Ultimately I think that lava and superheated plasma should not be considered environmental affects.

 

On the mental powers issue, I always thought that the distinction between human and alien minds was silly. In my group we agreed to use a sentient minds category. If your can talk, you are sentient. As a limitation, you could make your mental powers only work on your own species. The Alien class of minds might still be appropriate for some Lovecraftian horrors, but generally they don't make good PCs.

 

Animals aren't fit to be player characters. Being immune to mental powers that aren't specifically designed to affect them is a small side benefit of the crippling Physical Limitation: Animal Intelligence. If you make an "animal" that is a viable PC, then it probably isn't really an animal.

 

As for robots being immune to most mental powers, well that just makes sense. Automations are always immune to mental powers automatically, the computers that sometimes control them aren't. The machine class of minds consists of computers, and only computers. AIs use their ego, regular computers replace their intelligence for ego, like it says in the equipment chapter.

 

Being able to mind control or use telepathy on a computer is very useful in any setting where computers exist. It might be less useful in combat than mindcontrol versus humans, especially if you never fight a robot. But I think its a fair trade off for the benefits out of combat. Say you want to discreetly gather some information using telepathy. Use it on a human and you'll need to get a pretty high effect roll to keep him from knowing you read his mind. Use it on a computer with no AI and that doesn't matter. Who's it going to tell?

 

If you want to make a robot PC, then I personally have no problem at all with letting it be affected as a machine class of minds. If you find it unbalancing, make him pay points for it. I can't imagine it should be worth any more than 10 points, since that's how much it costs to affect him. Personally I'd let him have it for free but make sure it's balanced against the disadvantages of being a robot (and the points he gets for them). I'd even let him take automation only powers if it makes sense for him to have them.

[zornwil]

Re: Mental Powers

 

I'm absolutely with Hugh. I'm not opposed to the classes thing completely, but I think it should have been presented (if at all - not sure it was worth the space) as "here's an EXAMPLE of how a GM might want to deploy mental powers, and the campaign condition to do this is...". Otherwise the class thing, in my mind, is essentially useless because it trumps OTHER SFX, so now we have the system NOT ONLY delving deeper into SFX but doing so at odds with how powers might be constructed and how the campaign might be built and with little guidelines on that. A bad use of rules bandwidth, so to speak.

 

I think mental powers must be defined simply by SFX, and no more, no less, and if we must limit those SFX that's fine, the book can go ahead and give that guideline, then. But we know animals don't speak languages (well, generally)...so if your mental control is English-speaking broadcasting of thoughts, you will only be effective to the extent that Fido the dog, a normal house pet, knows the words you use. And that Spanish-only speaking guy will have some issues, too. Whereas if you broadcast pictures, the dog will see what you show...and intepret thusly. And so on and so on.

 

And that also bugs me about mental powers - this whole classes thing glosses over what should be requested of players, which is what really are the SFX of the mental power? I have a default that I use because IME most players are rather vague about it and they say "it's psionic". Well is that brain wave broadcasting/reception and tinkering? Or magic? Or energy that isn't brain waves but "reprograms' the target with biochemical impulses? Because - JUST LIKE EVERY OTHER POWER - that should drive the discussion.

 

Not general classes which may or may not apply to a campaign or genre.

[prestidigitator]

Re: Mental Powers

 

Let's take that Pirates game and add in Magic, so that mental powers become viable, at least. Presumably, the limitation for "Requires large quantities of water" for my Summon Water Elementals spell will be set at a pretty low level, since the ocean will normally be in the area.

 

However, if I change "Pirates" to "Lawrence of Arabia", and set the campaign in a desert, the limitation should be considerably greater for that game. A globetrotting campaign will set the limitation somewhere between these two extremes.

 

Yet the system, removes this judgement for Mental Powers that only affect certain classes of minds. Affecting, say, "Only Aliens" is of equal value whether we're polaying a Supers game where we encounter Alien-Class minds (say) every 20 adventures or less carries the same value as in a Sci Fi campaign that focuses on War Against the Aliens. To me, the value of that limitation varies considerably bgetween games, and so the value should be set individually fo0r the games, not incorporated as a default in the (supposedly SFX neutral) game rules.

Now hold on a second. Water is definitely rare in the desert; I won't argue that one. But, "Alien Class of Minds," doesn't have to mean it only affects beings that are not of our world. In a fantasy campaign, we could define dragons, extra-dimensional beings, or even undead to fit into the, "Alien Class." I view this more like Skills than Limitations: the definition is not set in stone, and it is typically easier to redefine what the Class of Minds means than to start re-costing things.

[zornwil]

Re: Mental Powers

 

I'd suggest we did fine without Class of Minds for many years prior to 5th.

 

PS - please read that to mean - so what is the problem statement that this addresses?

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Mental Powers

 

I'd suggest we did fine without Class of Minds for many years prior to 5th.

 

PS - please read that to mean - so what is the problem statement that this addresses?

 

The question that really should have been asked before classes of minds was enshrined in 5e.

 

Changes to the system should first assess what problem exists that the change will solve. I don't believe there was a problem before we had "classes of minds".

 

The next step is to assess possible solutions. Any solution, to be considered viable, needs to solve the original problem (or at least improve upon it) without creating new problems which exceed the old one.

 

As noted above, I don't see the problem classes of minds sets out to fix, and I don't see it solving things more than creating new problems.

[zornwil]

Re: Mental Powers

 

The question that really should have been asked before classes of minds was enshrined in 5e.

 

Changes to the system should first assess what problem exists that the change will solve. I don't believe there was a problem before we had "classes of minds".

 

The next step is to assess possible solutions. Any solution, to be considered viable, needs to solve the original problem (or at least improve upon it) without creating new problems which exceed the old one.

 

As noted above, I don't see the problem classes of minds sets out to fix, and I don't see it solving things more than creating new problems.

Originally I wasn't going to post again, as I only had something trivial to say, but then, on rethinking, I want to pick out the word "enshrine" above. That is what happens as Designers put rules down, even if they're intended only as suggestions (though if properly spelt out it does tend to lessen that impact). I personally have long said that no rules are sacred and I detest the approach as such, but so many people out there take these rules as gospel, in a way, and so that is why one has to be so careful as to what one really wants to put into the rules.

[Agent X]

Re: Mental Powers

 

It's actually rather evenly split.

 

I know from experience in play that you're wrong. I've ran it just fine. If you're having a problem- it's your problem. Correct it for YOUR game however you will.

 

Me, I'm done with this rather pointless exchange.

My game experience in the Oklahoma City area is reasonably broad and doesn't support the notion that classes of minds for mental powers is rather evenly split or that animal class mental powers are of equal utility to human class mental powers.

[Hawksmoor]

Re: Mental Powers

 

Ummm...

 

Did I miss the post that pointed out that Classes of Minds is *one* option presented in 5e and 5er? You know the other one that says you can attack "use a mental power on" a character outside of your class for a -3 ECV and -10 (-5 Ego Attack) on the effect roll.

 

I use that rule because it makes too much sense not too. That way I can have my minds classes and still mind thwap all I want to who ever I want.

 

Hawksmoor

[zornwil]

Re: Mental Powers

 

Ummm...

 

Did I miss the post that pointed out that Classes of Minds is *one* option presented in 5e and 5er? You know the other one that says you can attack "use a mental power on" a character outside of your class for a -3 ECV and -10 (-5 Ego Attack) on the effect roll.

 

I use that rule because it makes too much sense not too. That way I can have my minds classes and still mind thwap all I want to who ever I want.

 

Hawksmoor

I'm a bit confused - you say "the other" but that indicates the minuses for "outside of your class", so that sounds like it is in the context of the Classes "option".

 

Actually, reading 5ER on page 117, Classes is not indicated as an option at all. (hooray for the PDF! - and hooray for phone conferences as I can multi-task...)

[Hawksmoor]

Re: Mental Powers

 

Third paragraph on pg 117 5er. Mentions the option I used.

 

Hawksmoor

[zornwil]

Re: Mental Powers

 

Yes, but Classes of Mind is not optional, which you implied by stating "Classes of Minds is *one* option presented in 5e and 5er".

 

PS/EDIT - of course I view all rules as optional, but speaking with the "from the book" mentality here