Ethics for mentalists

[Karmakaze]

Re: Ethics for mentalists

 

I've run mentalist scenereos where mentalists have a vulnerability to mental attacks on the grounds that minds with active mental abilities are more "open"...

[nexus]

Re: Ethics for mentalists

 

Requires the Mentalist to keep his victim targeted for a very long time' date=' though, and I wouldn't be [i']too[/i] forgiving on that.

 

Also, what is the "fade rate" on a cumulative mental power? Do they get to make a few rolls every time they run into the victim over the course of a month or two or longer, or do their earlier accumulated "points" fade at some rate?

 

But really, I'd hesitate to allow the build we're discussing, no matter how legal it is.

 

I am very hesistant to allow Cumalative on mental powers. It just sets off my abusive alert.

[megaplayboy]

Re: Ethics for mentalists

 

I remember a passage in a Hero product where the most abusive power in practice was a 4d6 killing attack, because of the stun lotto.

 

I think the big dilemma in Hero is that there's no middle ground in the mental powers between "too effective" and "too ineffective".

[Kristopher]

Re: Ethics for mentalists

 

I wasn't even thinking of Mentalist vs Mentalist.

 

I've made quite a few non-mentalist characters with Mental Defense and high EGOs.

 

 

Example: my current PBEM character, Twilight, has a 17 EGO, 18 total Mental Defense, and Invisibility to the Mental Group. And no mental powers otherwise.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Ethics for mentalists

 

I remember a passage in a Hero product where the most abusive power in practice was a 4d6 killing attack, because of the stun lotto.

 

I think the big dilemma in Hero is that there's no middle ground in the mental powers between "too effective" and "too ineffective".

 

That was 4e Mystic Masters. The players were invited, even challenged, to build any 60 AP attack, to be as abusive and unbalanced as possible.

[SKJAM!]

Re: Ethics for mentalists

 

I agree that making someone think it was their own idea to break their religious/marital/ethical boundaries for casual sex is likely to end up doing much more harm to some people than others, and that should not be seen as the victim's fault. Not every campaign is set in 21st Century Las Vegas, after all.

 

That might make an useful background detail for a tarnished Bronze/Iron Age campaign. The mentalist merrily went about having fun sex, making the partner think it was their own idea, because "no harm no foul," right? Until of course they destroyed someone's life. So now the mentalist is much, much more careful.

 

I like the idea of making the adder for "it was your own idea" directly proportional to the level of objection the victim would have to the command itself.

 

Of note, White Wolf's new Vampire:the Requiem has a power known as Majesty, basically the Super-Charisma version of Mind Control. As written in the rules, the use of Majesty is undetectable. But the phrasing is such that some powergamer types interpret that to mean that even people who see someone acting entirely out of character will never guess that the victim's been mind controlled. How much of an adder would that be, do you think?

[Guest WhammeWhamme]

Re: Ethics for mentalists

 

I agree that making someone think it was their own idea to break their religious/marital/ethical boundaries for casual sex is likely to end up doing much more harm to some people than others, and that should not be seen as the victim's fault. Not every campaign is set in 21st Century Las Vegas, after all.

 

That might make an useful background detail for a tarnished Bronze/Iron Age campaign. The mentalist merrily went about having fun sex, making the partner think it was their own idea, because "no harm no foul," right? Until of course they destroyed someone's life. So now the mentalist is much, much more careful.

 

I like the idea of making the adder for "it was your own idea" directly proportional to the level of objection the victim would have to the command itself.

 

Of note, White Wolf's new Vampire:the Requiem has a power known as Majesty, basically the Super-Charisma version of Mind Control. As written in the rules, the use of Majesty is undetectable. But the phrasing is such that some powergamer types interpret that to mean that even people who see someone acting entirely out of character will never guess that the victim's been mind controlled. How much of an adder would that be, do you think?

 

Adder? Advantages. Megascale and Area Effect.

[SKJAM!]

Re: Ethics for mentalists

 

Adder? Advantages. Megascale and Area Effect.

 

And probably a Multiple Power Attack, since it's two separate commands: to the main victim, it's "You will forget that you were just calling for my head on a platter and have casual sex with me while thinking it was your own decision" and to everyone else "You will not find anything odd about the victim changing from wanting to kill me to wanting to have sex with me in a matter of seconds."

 

What the WW authors seem to have meant was Invisible Power Effects, and possibly the "You think it was your own idea" Adder.

[Chuckg]

Re: Ethics for mentalists

 

That might make an useful background detail for a tarnished Bronze/Iron Age campaign. The mentalist merrily went about having fun sex' date=' making the partner think it was their own idea, because "no harm no foul," right? Until of course they destroyed someone's life. So now the mentalist is much, much more careful.[/quote']

 

This sort of background detail actually makes me sorry that Headhunter wasn't carried over into 5e. (Well, yes, he was reincarnated as 'Witchfinder', but with a different focus.)

[Kristopher]

Re: Ethics for mentalists

 

I agree that making someone think it was their own idea to break their religious/marital/ethical boundaries for casual sex is likely to end up doing much more harm to some people than others, and that should not be seen as the victim's fault. Not every campaign is set in 21st Century Las Vegas, after all.

 

That might make an useful background detail for a tarnished Bronze/Iron Age campaign. The mentalist merrily went about having fun sex, making the partner think it was their own idea, because "no harm no foul," right? Until of course they destroyed someone's life. So now the mentalist is much, much more careful.

 

I like the idea of making the adder for "it was your own idea" directly proportional to the level of objection the victim would have to the command itself.

 

Of note, White Wolf's new Vampire:the Requiem has a power known as Majesty, basically the Super-Charisma version of Mind Control. As written in the rules, the use of Majesty is undetectable. But the phrasing is such that some powergamer types interpret that to mean that even people who see someone acting entirely out of character will never guess that the victim's been mind controlled. How much of an adder would that be, do you think?

 

The Requiem sucks, and WW ruined a decent system by going to that craptacular one-roll combat system.

 

[/compulsive grumble]

[nexus]

Re: Ethics for mentalists

 

I agree that making someone think it was their own idea to break their religious/marital/ethical boundaries for casual sex is likely to end up doing much more harm to some people than others, and that should not be seen as the victim's fault. Not every campaign is set in 21st Century Las Vegas, after all.

 

That might make an useful background detail for a tarnished Bronze/Iron Age campaign. The mentalist merrily went about having fun sex, making the partner think it was their own idea, because "no harm no foul," right? Until of course they destroyed someone's life. So now the mentalist is much, much more careful.

 

I like the idea of making the adder for "it was your own idea" directly proportional to the level of objection the victim would have to the command itself.

 

Of note, White Wolf's new Vampire:the Requiem has a power known as Majesty, basically the Super-Charisma version of Mind Control. As written in the rules, the use of Majesty is undetectable. But the phrasing is such that some powergamer types interpret that to mean that even people who see someone acting entirely out of character will never guess that the victim's been mind controlled. How much of an adder would that be, do you think?

 

I did have a character in a "Teen" game once that was similar. He was a very troubled young man just coming to grips with his homosexaulity and his secret crush on his best friend, when he eventually came to his friend he found his affections were returned. The two were lovers for awhile until the character discovered he was a mutant and was unconsiously projecting a powerful telepathic command to his friend. When he gained control, the friend snapped out of it, but was very traumatized by the experience and eventually killed himself

 

Edit: I can't deny though that drama/investigation part of me dislikes the "think it was your own idea" adder being seemingly so absolute.

[Karma]

Re: Ethics for mentalists

 

If +20 is that effective, I'd probably have to house rule another level in there where the target doesn't realize they were mind controlled, at least initially but they react normally to suddenly deciding to do bizarre things for no reason.

 

but that's difting off topic

 

Yes I like the idea of 'no matter how high you get you cannot change the suconcious with Mind Control'. You can convince the concsious mind that what it is doing is their own idea, but after the fact they will have reactions, based on the subconsious, in line with the actual facts of what was done to them (ie. that they were forced to do something they were opposed to). For instance the woamn who is 'convinced' the sleep with the mentalist develops a fear of being touched by men etc. desite the fact she thinks it was all her idea.

Long term damage to victims psyches would be in direct proportion to how high a level you needed to get to convince the. None for 'wouldn't mind doing' to "Years of therapy might not be enough" for those who were forced to work against theit deepest held beliefs, and even more so if they were convinced it was their idea, since the idea that you suddenly decided of your own free will to do something you find abhorent or at least 'out of character' would have to effect you more than being forced to do the same thing.

 

Of course if you used this ruling Mind contol would become unethical beyond the 'wouldn't mind doing' level, and using it unsanctioned would be a crime of a magnitude comparable to Killing Attacks.

[Wanderer]

Re: Ethics for mentalists

 

I do think mentalists shouldn't be effectively immune to the mental powers of others(and yes, I do mean powers other than ego blast), just because they have a higher ego and mental defense. martial artists aren't immune to other martial artists, bricks aren't immune to other bricks, etc.

Obviously it should be more difficult to accomplish a given effect. But not impossible.

 

About the peculiar problem of not building characters that are meant to have high Ego, Ment Def, and Pre (e.g. mentalists, fearless warriors, and the like) as being completely immune to mental influence, and their own Psych Lims, I've concocted a power construct which in my experience really does much to solve the problem: build all Mental Defense and all Ego and Pre above 10 as follows:

 

Heroic Resolve: +XX EGO; Cannot Be Used To Overcome Psychological Limitations, or Resist Mental Attacks That Take Advantage of Psychological Limitations (-1/2)

 

Heroic Resolve: +XX PRE; Cannot Be Used To Resist Presence Attacks That Take Advantage of Psychological Limitations (-1/2)

 

Mental Shielding: XX Mental Defense; Cannot Be Used To Resist Mental Attacks That Take Advantage of Psychological Limitations (-1/2)

 

While leaving normal EGO & PRE to 10 (or even less)

 

This ensures that while the character will have high ECV to use his mental powers effectively, and be quite resilient to "vanilla" Mental Powers and Pre Attacks, according to concept, clever mentalists that do their research and take the effort to tailor Mind Control, Mental Illusions and Pre Attacks to exploit the character's hot buttons, will find ample holes in the character's willpower armor. Morevoer, it also ensures that if the character has serious psychological issues, he isn't able to always effortlessly shrug them off just because he is supposed to be an intrepid hero. This kind of Ego construct also ensures that Enraged and other Psych Lims remain balanced as regards resistence rolls.

 

As a matter of fact, if the character is meant to have any Psych Lims at all (and which hasn't ?), I typically do not buy any Ego or Pre above 10 without these limitations.

 

Hey, it saves some points, too!

[Karma]

Re: Ethics for mentalists

 

i.e. -- the little kid wants to try claiming he was mind-controlled to steal that candy? The court can handle this in two minutes with one cheap casting... 'OK, junior, just step this way and make your deposition -- under oath.' *casts spell*

 

"But at the time I thought t was my idea to steal the candy and give it to Micheal, but then I heard that he was a mentalist and they can make you think somethings your idea and I started thinking "why would I steal candy for a freak like him" and it hits me, he must have made me do it and make me think it was my idea."

 

When am +20 roll can make it possible to convince someone it was their idea, 'Detect Lie' becomes a whole lot less useful.

 

Lerts face it a powerful mentalist with IPA on his Mind control is untouchable legally, no matter what spell you cast on his victims.

[Karma]

Re: Ethics for mentalists

 

Side Question: Mentalist doesn't have MC. What he does have is Telepathy at high enough levels to matter. He finds a girl, reads her mind as deeply as he can and proceeds to use this in-depth knowledge to seduce her. As far as she's concerned she's found the 'perfect catch' and is probably going to enjoy the experience all the more because of it.

 

How ethical would you say this was?

[nexus]

Re: Ethics for mentalists

 

Side Question: Mentalist doesn't have MC. What he does have is Telepathy at high enough levels to matter. He finds a girl, reads her mind as deeply as he can and proceeds to use this in-depth knowledge to seduce her. As far as she's concerned she's found the 'perfect catch' and is probably going to enjoy the experience all the more because of it.

 

How ethical would you say this was?

 

The unapproved telepathic probing would be, at least, an invasion of her privacy on the level of breaking into her house and reading her private journals, hacking her computer to get her surfing records, going threw her trash,etc, IOW a major one. Using that knowledge to get her into bed is cadish and sleazy to say the least. I would call it unethical, particularly if your sole reason is to get her in the sack, get your jollies and dump her, assuming the telepath used the premise of a relationship as part of his lure and not just a promising sexual encounter with no intention of following threw on it. She might enjoy the "experience" but it might still lead to emotional pain later, again for no purpose but slaking the mentalist's lust. He's violated her mind again, just not her will so while it might be "less" severe I think it would unethical, at least as much as pychiatrist using what they know of a patient to seduce her, maybe more so because what was given to them was giving willingly and knowingly.

 

But Sci fi abounds with stories where telepaths are wonderful lovers because they know just what you want, when you want it (with the ususally unspoken part they can avoid anything you'd hate). Would using Telepathy like that, particularly without your partners permission be unethical? Does the level of "scan" needed make a difference?

 

Edit: Total aside, but its interesting all the seduction examples are males attempting to get access to females.

[transmetahuman]

Re: Ethics for mentalists

 

Why should "Target thinks it was his own idea" be a fixed added anyway? What about making it equal to the Ego bonus required to make the command in the first place.

 

Thus, there's no extra cost to making someone think something they were going to do anyway is their own idea. It's Ego + 10 to make the target get that ice cream they "Wouldn't mind" and +20 to make them remember it as being their idea.

 

"Kill your family and bathe in their blood" is Ego +30 to make it happen, and a further +30 to plant the firm belief in their mind that iyt was their idea to do it.

 

In other words, the tougher it is to make them take the action in the first place, the tougher it will be to make them ratonalize it as their own idea.

Very interesting. Incorporating the Psych Limits modifiers makes sense from an sfx perspective, too - so a "violently opposed" action (+30) that nonetheless matches his Psych Limit (like, say, really bad temper) might only need +20 effect to make him think it's his own action... he has a built-in reason to believe he could do that ("oh no! damn my temper!"). Whereas the most heinous possible acts, on someone who knows he would never do such a thing ("I always watched out for my brother, I love him") would top out at +40 on top of the +40, giving +80 needed to let them rationalize the act as their own. That's a lot of dice, but I like the way it emphasizes the need to choose your effects carefully - and I really like the way it makes things simpler for "stuff you'd do anyway" level commands. Making a guard search the other corridor first, but having him instantly realize it was coerced, is kind of self-defeating; it shouldn't take the same level of effort as making him not report you after he does see you (+20).

 

Would you also scale "not remember actions", or leave that as a flat +10? I think I'd leave it flat.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Ethics for mentalists

 

Would you also scale "not remember actions"' date=' or leave that as a flat +10? I think I'd leave it flat.[/quote']

 

Leave it flat, I think. The other option would be to make it half the cost of believing it was his own idea, but I don't think the "blackout mind control" needs to be as scaled as the "my idea" mind control.

[Guest WhammeWhamme]

Re: Ethics for mentalists

 

Yes I like the idea of 'no matter how high you get you cannot change the suconcious with Mind Control'. You can convince the concsious mind that what it is doing is their own idea, but after the fact they will have reactions, based on the subconsious, in line with the actual facts of what was done to them (ie. that they were forced to do something they were opposed to). For instance the woamn who is 'convinced' the sleep with the mentalist develops a fear of being touched by men etc. desite the fact she thinks it was all her idea.

Long term damage to victims psyches would be in direct proportion to how high a level you needed to get to convince the. None for 'wouldn't mind doing' to "Years of therapy might not be enough" for those who were forced to work against theit deepest held beliefs, and even more so if they were convinced it was their idea, since the idea that you suddenly decided of your own free will to do something you find abhorent or at least 'out of character' would have to effect you more than being forced to do the same thing.

 

Of course if you used this ruling Mind contol would become unethical beyond the 'wouldn't mind doing' level, and using it unsanctioned would be a crime of a magnitude comparable to Killing Attacks.

 

Any effect should be possible in Hero. Period. Especially ones that match existing concepts.

 

Mentalists in some mediums DO effortlessly alter single memories or thoughts with no long term harm. And it is not a particularly powerful effect compared to it's cost as is.

 

You want to mandate certain limitations (mostly side effects) on all mental powers _in your game_, feel free. That's what the limitations rules are there for.

 

But don't try and claim that crippling the Game's ability to simulate certain powers is a good thing. It is not.