Mental Powers

[Dust Raven]

Re: Mental Powers

 

This is faulty logic. Based on this' date=' the Class of Minds rule shiould be removed for the very reason that many others may stop buying future additions by the inclusion of such things.[/quote']

 

You know, this is the best reason for removing the rule or making it explicitly optional. If you don't give the customer what he wants, the customer will find someone who will.

 

Might not make the game any better or worse, but it'll sell books.

[Dust Raven]

Re: Mental Powers

 

Conceptually, by extension, as I have asked, what is the difference?

 

Class of Minds attempts to simulate the way mental powers work in settings by divvying them up according to broad ways they work in the source material, I assume. (If that's not the case, then I don't know why they made such a specific default to it) It then assigns a matrix of how they affect each other (with an optional system, the -3 thing).

 

While magic is more varied, would be more complex, and therefore probably not suitable simply on that basis, setting that aside, by conceptually extending this (new) train of thought in HERO, why not do that for Magic? Heck, why not do it for general SFX, if one didn't mind having a 1000 classes? Obviously the latter is way beyond the pragmatic breaking point, but I am asking this question on purely a conceptual basis.

 

Well, the default is the most basic possible setting for classes. Human (us, representing the way the human mind works), Animal (representing that base creatures "think" differently than humans), Machine (an obvious class, as machines technically don't have minds as we know them, or minds even comparable to human thinking), and Alien (the catch-all category of anything that does not fall into any of the other categories). The very next setting tells the GM to create additional classes if needed, or to alters these if needed.

[Dust Raven]

Re: Mental Powers

 

In fact, separately, I would like to elaborate here:

 

"(If that's not the case, then I don't know why they made such a specific default to it) "

 

I say this because in point of fact, why would the rules not instead state something such as (but better, I'm not spending the time to write this up properly), "Settings normally have beings divided into different "Classes of Minds". A Class of Mind is a broad group of beings whose minds may, assuming Mental Powers are employed, interact. Beings not in the same class cannot interact, without using a +10 Adder to purchase that additional Class of Minds. GMs should strive to ensure there is balance among the Classes of Minds. The default for many modern and sci-fi games are Alien, Machine, Animal, and Human. The Machine Class of Minds is a good example of a creative use of Class of Minds to represent..."

 

Because it doesn't take much at all to address it this way if in fact the rules weren't deliberately stating "here is a standard for a majority, if not most, campaigns," which, given the lack of any such approach as I have described, must be a deliberate point.

 

Not so much as a direct reply, but this post inspired to me reread the section on Classes of Mind in the original Ultimate Mentalist. I found that the information contained there is much more detailed and understandable, and leaves little to interpretation. Perhaps because I already have read these rules here, my opinion and understanding of what's written in 5E is, for lack of a more appropriate term, more complete than someone who's only read 5E. Unfortunately, Steve Long either didn't want to or was unable to include the entirety of this rule in 5E, which I feel he should have. Basically the entire section of how Mental Powers work made it into 5E, somewhat abbreviated, and it seems like Classes of Mind got the most cut out explination wise.

 

I'll continue to stand by my opinion that the rule is sound, fair and serves a universal purpose in the Hero System, but since this opinion is based on rule description found in a 4th edition book (which has yet to be Fifth Editionized), I'll hold off for now (that, I'm this thread is really hurting my head... need more Mental Defense).

 

Oh, crap, Dust Raven, that's what I feared, you're up and on the boards, I remembered this is your time of day...now I'm never going to get off the boards tonight!

 

[zornwil]

Re: Mental Powers

 

How true this is' date=' and repped as soon as I can manage it. I have a game tomorrow and that last thing I want to do is answer "so, how's your week been?" with "oh, bitching about mental powers mostly".[/quote']

I hope this doesn't really bother you.

[zornwil]

Re: Mental Powers

 

Well' date=' the default is the most basic possible setting for classes. Human (us, representing the way the human mind works), Animal (representing that base creatures "think" differently than humans), Machine (an obvious class, as machines technically don't have minds as we know them, or minds even comparable to human thinking), and Alien (the catch-all category of anything that does not fall into any of the other categories). The very next setting tells the GM to create additional classes if needed, or to alters these if needed.[/quote']

I didn't think "Alien" was "catch-all". I figured Animal was personally.

 

Another example of confusion on this.

 

And I don't know how you'd apply this to a Fantasy game. Are Gods "Aliens"? Aren't they human? I really honestly don't know.

 

None of that's even a criticism, even if it begs one.

 

And the thing is, and it's not like we can really go further on this as it's down to this level, but I just don't see that as a default at all.

[zornwil]

Re: Mental Powers

 

Not so much as a direct reply, but this post inspired to me reread the section on Classes of Mind in the original Ultimate Mentalist. I found that the information contained there is much more detailed and understandable, and leaves little to interpretation. Perhaps because I already have read these rules here, my opinion and understanding of what's written in 5E is, for lack of a more appropriate term, more complete than someone who's only read 5E. Unfortunately, Steve Long either didn't want to or was unable to include the entirety of this rule in 5E, which I feel he should have. Basically the entire section of how Mental Powers work made it into 5E, somewhat abbreviated, and it seems like Classes of Mind got the most cut out explination wise.

 

I'll continue to stand by my opinion that the rule is sound, fair and serves a universal purpose in the Hero System, but since this opinion is based on rule description found in a 4th edition book (which has yet to be Fifth Editionized), I'll hold off for now (that, I'm this thread is really hurting my head... need more Mental Defense).

 

 

 

At least we're down to briefer posts!

 

[Dust Raven]

Re: Mental Powers

 

I hope this doesn't really bother you.

 

Well, once we get down to playing, we tend to talk game mechanics... I'm just afraid I'm going to be online posting to this thread while I wait for the players to show up and see something my Psychological Limitation requires me to mention to everybody. I'm not really stressed out about it. For the most part, I'm enjoying the discussion (as frustrating as it is sometimes). Most of my players aren't into message boards and might be bored with me going on about it.

[Dust Raven]

Re: Mental Powers

 

I didn't think "Alien" was "catch-all". I figured Animal was personally.

 

Another example of confusion on this.

 

And I don't know how you'd apply this to a Fantasy game. Are Gods "Aliens"? Aren't they human? I really honestly don't know.

 

None of that's even a criticism, even if it begs one.

 

And the thing is, and it's not like we can really go further on this as it's down to this level, but I just don't see that as a default at all.

 

Yeah.

 

The info on Alien classes of mind is in Ultimate Mentalist (which is still on sale in PDF in the online store btw). I kinda feel really silly now after all of this. Everything I've been basing my opinions on isn't even a 5th edition book, even though the rule is officially 5th edition.

[Dust Raven]

Re: Mental Powers

 

At least we're down to briefer posts!

 

 

Certainly seems that way...

 

Hope it lasts.

[zornwil]

Re: Mental Powers

 

Well' date=' once we get down to playing, we tend to talk game mechanics... I'm just afraid I'm going to be online posting to this thread while I wait for the players to show up and see something my Psychological Limitation requires me to mention to everybody. I'm not really stressed out about it. For the most part, I'm enjoying the discussion (as frustrating as it is sometimes). Most of my players aren't into message boards and might be bored with me going on about it.[/quote']

Ah, I can understand that!

 

Of course one of my players used my "must respond" Psych Lim against me, subtly goading me for quite a while on a particular topic (which I won't get into) until I said, "That's it, I'm going to post something about that!"

[zornwil]

Re: Mental Powers

 

Yeah.

 

The info on Alien classes of mind is in Ultimate Mentalist (which is still on sale in PDF in the online store btw). I kinda feel really silly now after all of this. Everything I've been basing my opinions on isn't even a 5th edition book, even though the rule is officially 5th edition.

I can also see much better where you're coming from, too. As I said earlier, I can see where CoM might work a lot better if better explained, and so since you have that background I can understand.

[zornwil]

Re: Mental Powers

 

Certainly seems that way...

 

Hope it lasts.

[zornwil]

Re: Mental Powers

 

You know, this is the best reason for removing the rule or making it explicitly optional. If you don't give the customer what he wants, the customer will find someone who will.

 

Might not make the game any better or worse, but it'll sell books.

BTW, and this is irrespective of this particular issue, I do agree that as commerciality enters into it, one must adjust rules to suit that as well, and it's easy for any/all of us to argue from a more "pure" perspective.

 

Along these lines, I entirely understand why many things haven't been addressed/overhauled, and I entirely admit I'd make the same decision in many areas to not change simply for the sake of satisfying a current customer base.

 

PS - good night Dust Raven!

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Mental Powers

 

First-

 

The first key requirement of optional rules in a point build system is that they do not require you to reconstruct your character builds. Rather, they add on or modify the results of existing builds.

 

I assume, then, that you consider hit locations to be a poor optional rule. In a game without such, I would take extra damage and define this as "targetting a vital area". Add hit locations, and I instead buy PSL's to offset penalties for targetting a vital area.

 

Second-

 

Optional rules should by nature be *more* complex than the default rules. Default rules should be simple, allowing one to layer in addition work and options to suit one's taste.

 

The difference between a default that says "put limits on all your mental powers and/buy defense for all your animal, machines, and aliens (which have to have their own limits btw)" and a simple 4 item list and 10 point adders is immense. And it breaks both the above rules.

 

Toe May Toe

Toe Mah Toe

 

A default of two types of mind - those with Ego (self-willed) and those lacking Ego (not self-willed) seems, to me, less complex than layering four different classes of mind over these two separate categories (and let's not get into the third dimension created by automatons).

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Mental Powers

 

Mental Powers can also be defined using classes of mind. It's not essential to do without. Doing without it should be an option for graming how Mental Powers work. Oh wait... it is.

 

We know how physical mass works. We have no idea how an intelligent mind other than that of a human being might or might work. Your assumption that all minds should be identical is unreasonable, illogical and unfounded. Granted, my (and apparently Steve Long's) assumption is also unfounded (how could it be?), but it's reasonable and logical. The rules (all of them) take this logical understand of how physical mass, intelligence/sentience, and whatever all works. You just disagree with a logical conclusion you don't seem to believe in.

 

As you say, we have no idea how an intelligent, but non-human, mind might work. As such, to me, there is no logic in imposing a structure which presupposes it works in a specific way. As you note above, the classes of mind rule is a reasonable and logical, but ultimately unfounded, assumption of how these minds might work, and might interact with mental powers (the mechanics of which are equally unfounded).

 

With this in mind, I submit that classes of mind are one possible interpretation (and thus merit inclusion as an optional rule), but are not the only possible interpretation, nor necessarily the best possible interpretation overall. As such, they should be optional, and not default.

 

Each of these thing you mention are setting/genre specific. Classes of Minds is system wide. Though modified setting to setting and campaign to campaign (like starting points for PCs)' date=' the rule itself applies in nearly all cases.[/quote']

 

This is the salient point of disagreement. You consider Classes of Mind to be applicable across all settings in all genres. I consider there to be settings/genres where a different approach would function as well or better. Thus, you classify CoM as a necessary core rule, where I classify it as a setting-specific, non-essential and therefore appropriately optional rule.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Mental Powers

 

If we suddenly got a new player who asked my this tomorrow' date=' I'd answer a bit differently (given the current campaign). I'd ask about the type of mind they want their character to have, and mention [b']there are just as many villains and NPCs with powers affecting that kind of mind as there are for humans[/b]. If they're okay with that, all I'd have to do as GM is make that true. Some times they'll be the only character immune to mental powers, something the only target, and sometimes it wouldn't matter.

 

Emphasis mine.

 

To me, that is a key point. Based on that comment, and assuming your game is already structured in that fashion, you have built your setting in a fashion which makes the Classes of Mind rules work. I suspect a player who plays in the "default" CU (as an example only) without modification, using the default Classes of Mind rules, again without modification from the 5e rules, would find that equality does not exist. As such, equality between classes of mind (and powers designed to affect each class of mind) would not exist.

 

Even with a balance that assures one class of mind is neither advantaged nor diosadvanaged when opposed by mentalists, I continue to have an issue with the balancing of mental powers against non-mental powers.

 

"hmmm...I can use Ego Blast, but I either need to select the correct 6d6 Ego Blast from my multipower that holds one for each class of minds, or use the slot that covers all classes, but only does 3d6. Maybe I can narrow it - he's organic, so not Machine, and he doesn't LOOK animalistic. I'll use the slot that affects Human and has Alien adder. That's 5d6, and almost certain to work. Hope he doesn't have Mental Defense"

 

OR

 

"No visible force field - use my NND"

 

OR

 

"I'll use my Energy Blast - that works every time!"

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Mental Powers

 

Not so much as a direct reply, but this post inspired to me reread the section on Classes of Mind in the original Ultimate Mentalist. I found that the information contained there is much more detailed and understandable, and leaves little to interpretation. Perhaps because I already have read these rules here, my opinion and understanding of what's written in 5E is, for lack of a more appropriate term, more complete than someone who's only read 5E. Unfortunately, Steve Long either didn't want to or was unable to include the entirety of this rule in 5E, which I feel he should have. Basically the entire section of how Mental Powers work made it into 5E, somewhat abbreviated, and it seems like Classes of Mind got the most cut out explination wise.

 

I'll continue to stand by my opinion that the rule is sound, fair and serves a universal purpose in the Hero System, but since this opinion is based on rule description found in a 4th edition book (which has yet to be Fifth Editionized), I'll hold off for now (that, I'm this thread is really hurting my head... need more Mental Defense).

 

Of course, if the core rules add more explanation and leave less interpretation, we will now get debates overe whether that definition of (say) Alien Minds is appropriate.

 

I have not re-read Ultimate Mentalist for years, so I don't recall the Alien Minds definition, but since you're applying those rules, it sounds like they would say "the truly unusual mind", not "Different species. Humans with pointy ears" (whether a Marvel atlantean, Star Trek Vulcan or D&D Elf). From his FAQ answer, Steve appears to have drifted from that "completely alien mindset" definition over the years.

 

The need for additional explanation (both that in the 4e Ultimate Mentalist and Zornwil's summary draft of application of CoM) helps push this into optional territory in my mind. The core rules need to stop somewhere, if they are to be physically managable (some would say they are not at present), and rules like CoM, which strike me as needing more space to be fully developed, and less than essential across all genres and settings, should be the rules transferred to optional status (and optional books).

[zornwil]

Re: Mental Powers

 

Emphasis mine.

 

To me, that is a key point. Based on that comment, and assuming your game is already structured in that fashion, you have built your setting in a fashion which makes the Classes of Mind rules work. I suspect a player who plays in the "default" CU (as an example only) without modification, using the default Classes of Mind rules, again without modification from the 5e rules, would find that equality does not exist. As such, equality between classes of mind (and powers designed to affect each class of mind) would not exist.

 

Even with a balance that assures one class of mind is neither advantaged nor diosadvanaged when opposed by mentalists, I continue to have an issue with the balancing of mental powers against non-mental powers.

 

"hmmm...I can use Ego Blast, but I either need to select the correct 6d6 Ego Blast from my multipower that holds one for each class of minds, or use the slot that covers all classes, but only does 3d6. Maybe I can narrow it - he's organic, so not Machine, and he doesn't LOOK animalistic. I'll use the slot that affects Human and has Alien adder. That's 5d6, and almost certain to work. Hope he doesn't have Mental Defense"

 

OR

 

"No visible force field - use my NND"

 

OR

 

"I'll use my Energy Blast - that works every time!"

That's a good point in terms of actual game play, even taking the rule at face value and simply accepting it. I wonder how people deal with the factor of having to guess, or if NPCs are just so frequently in the single CoM used by PCs that it simply is so rarely likely it's not an issue.?

 

Dust Raven, how is it in your group?

[zornwil]

Re: Mental Powers

 

Of course, if the core rules add more explanation and leave less interpretation, we will now get debates overe whether that definition of (say) Alien Minds is appropriate.

 

I have not re-read Ultimate Mentalist for years, so I don't recall the Alien Minds definition, but since you're applying those rules, it sounds like they would say "the truly unusual mind", not "Different species. Humans with pointy ears" (whether a Marvel atlantean, Star Trek Vulcan or D&D Elf). From his FAQ answer, Steve appears to have drifted from that "completely alien mindset" definition over the years.

 

The need for additional explanation (both that in the 4e Ultimate Mentalist and Zornwil's summary draft of application of CoM) helps push this into optional territory in my mind. The core rules need to stop somewhere, if they are to be physically managable (some would say they are not at present), and rules like CoM, which strike me as needing more space to be fully developed, and less than essential across all genres and settings, should be the rules transferred to optional status (and optional books).

I'd say if it were well explicated and indicated something such as "many settings make the most sense with no Class of Minds differentiation among organic beings, using the construct perhaps simply to differentiate Machines/Automotons," then, while I personally would still disagree with it as being in the core, I would find it at least reasonable.

 

PS - would you be okay with "optional in the book" as opposed to "optional from other books"? Just curious, and you may have said before, but the thread is getting too long and I'm too lazy, particularly as the sole reason I am up is because the dog is sink AND we have a leak.

[Fox1]

Re: Mental Powers

 

Thing is, CoM was added brand new, so in this case you're saying it was a correct level of minutiae for it to get into, that this in itself is the opposite of a warning sign as you think they got this right.

 

 

I already spoke to this point. To me, it was never new.

 

Much like multi-power attacks, I always thought the system always worked these way. In this case 5th edition was no change, it merely caught up with one of my already existing house rules.

 

 

On a more serious note than above, presuming animals aren't "self-motivated" is something that gets into almost the same territory as assigning a cosmology to HERO.

 

HERO does have a cosmology already. That cosmology is the underlying concepts that produce the game design.

 

However in this specific case, the rules don't speak to "self-motivated" nor define PC and NPC. It leaves the definition of the Classes as well as the number up to the GM to fit within his cosmology.

 

I've done so, and done so in a way to match the default classes (although I've renamed 'alien' myself).

 

Why others are having trouble doing so is beyond me.

 

I would have to imagine they also have problems with the cost struction of Missile Defection and some of the Enhanced Senses as well- for those powers use the same basic costing concept.

[Fox1]

Re: Mental Powers

 

I assume' date=' then, that you consider hit locations to be a poor optional rule. In a game without such, I would take extra damage and define this as "targetting a vital area". Add hit locations, and I instead buy PSL's to offset penalties for targetting a vital area.[/quote']

 

No. In a game without such, I'd consider that they'd just be ignored- like they are in every other game on the market.

 

Beyond that, such constructions are by definition House Rules. They don't appear in the core rulebook, and it's left to the GM to determine if such a build is suitable for his game. In many campaigns, it would not be legal for anyone approach the damage cap set in place by the GM.

 

 

 

A default of two types of mind - those with Ego (self-willed) and those lacking Ego (not self-willed) seems, to me, less complex than layering four different classes of mind over these two separate categories (and let's not get into the third dimension created by automatons).

 

That's basically stating that there are no classes of minds at all (as the presence of EGO determines if the construction need to be assign a class of mind in the first place), which is your default stance.

 

Sorry, but I've already covered why this is bad design.

[Fox1]

Re: Mental Powers

 

This is the salient point of disagreement. You consider Classes of Mind to be applicable across all settings in all genres.

 

They are.

 

Some settings just happen to only have one class of mind present.

[Fox1]

Re: Mental Powers

 

That's a good point in terms of actual game play, even taking the rule at face value and simply accepting it. I wonder how people deal with the factor of having to guess, or if NPCs are just so frequently in the single CoM used by PCs that it simply is so rarely likely it's not an issue.?

 

Dust Raven, how is it in your group?

 

In mine, it's generally bleeding obvious.

[Fox1]

Re: Mental Powers

 

"I'll use my Energy Blast - that works every time!"

 

There are advantages and disadvantages to every power in the book.

 

A throw rock EB may be blocked by base Missile Deflection, while rock thrower's buddy laser lad is unaffected.

 

EB boy may find the target's ED too high to affect, which Mental Girl even after losing a dice or two to CoM is still able to get through.

 

 

People are hung up too much on points, and don't realize that value is per the specific encounter. When using CoM, it's up to the GM to enact encounters such that value is achieved- i.e. the same way it is with everything in HERO.

[schir1964]

Re: Mental Powers

 

And you can buy a Drain BODY defined as a disentrgation ray' date=' only the target heals rather quickly if not totally destroyed.[/quote']

Clarification: Actually, no, you can't kill someone with a Drain. The character appears to die, but once the Drain fades enough, the character revives and is alive once again. Per the rules, per Steve Long.

 

Someone specifically asked Steve Long about this and that was his answer.

 

I know how you just love Steve Long's official Rulings. (8^D)

 

Again, just a Clarication of the rules

 

- Christopher Mullins