The "Mental"-ness of Mental Powers

[Chris Goodwin]

This part of the discussion started on Phil's 6e Characteristics thread. I felt uncomfortable belaboring Mental Powers over there, so decided to put it into a new thread.

 

So. If the wall doesn't have Mental Defense it bypasses it because Mental Powers are "special." If the wall does have Mental Defense it doesn't bypass it because Mental Defense stop Mental Powers.

 

Does it or does it not ignore the wall? If it ignores the wall (because Mental Powers are "special") then the walls apparent Defenses are irrelevant. If it goes through the wall unhindered then that is because there is nothing to stop it from doing so. Apply appropriate Defenses and there is something to stop it from doing so.

 

No special properties are removed. It has simply encountered resistance.

 

I refuse to reconcile the idea that because appropriate defenses are removed that Indirect is magically added.

 

If it helps.... a Force Wall with no ED is not necessarily Transparent to Energy. A 1 BODY Energy attack would take it down. If the Force Wall were to have BODY (i.e. a regular wall with 0 ED), then it would take 1 BODY. I think that the "specialness" I'm talking about refers to, essentially, all "normal" objects (brick walls, etc.) that don't have Mental Defense being Transparent to Mental. (Actually the "specialness" I'm referring to refers to more than that, but that's at least included.)

 

A Force Wall with no ED that was Transparent to Energy Attacks would similarly allow an Energy-based Blast through, no need for Indirect.

 

It would be perfectly within a GM's rights to say that, "In this campaign world, normal objects are not Transparent to Mental Powers by default." In that case, you would need Indirect to get through a wall.

 

5er p. 116 states that barriers don't stop Mental Powers, so, barriers don't stop them -- but what if the barrier had Mental Defense? Would that matter? If not, how would you build a barrier that did stop Mental Powers? (I'm not asking rhetorically; this discussion has me curious now about the answer.)

 

Given that it's stated that barriers don't stop Mental Powers, is that because barriers are considered to be Transparent (in the Force Wall sense) to Mental Powers, or is it because being a Mental Power affords the Power some degree of Indirect-ness, or is it because being an LOS Power affords some degree of Indirect-ness? I think that's the question we're trying to answer.

 

It's stated in the description of Based On ECV that that Advantage doesn't turn the Power into a Mental Power. That's fair, but that raises the question; what combination of Modifiers does? If I buy BOECV and LOS and Invisible to all but Mental, and all of the other bits I'm forgetting at the moment, does it "become" a Mental Power? I used to have a house rule document that said, essentially, if you bought all of that other stuff you could pay an additional +1/4 to turn it into a Mental Power, at which point it doesn't just "act like" a Mental Power, it is one.

 

Edited to add: So, when you say this....

 

I refuse to reconcile the idea that because appropriate defenses are removed that Indirect is magically added.

 

...I agree with you. For Force Walls it's done by adding the Transparent Advantage. I think that we're trying to figure out is, is that a property of Force Walls and/or ordinary objects, or is it a property of Mental Powers?

[ghost-angel]

Re: The "Mental"-ness of Mental Powers

 

Good idea on the thread move, should have done it myself.

 

Moving beyond Force Wall Power.

 

Let's say you're building a Base. You have the bases outer walls - these are brick and mortar walls. They provide the standard DEF Power (PD + ED). But nothing else. Some one looks into a window can see a Target.

 

They can choose to Attack the target with a number of things. The window itself provides almost no defenses. Pretty much everything goes through.

 

Say you have X-Ray Vision and are looking through the brick portion with it, your trusty gun isn't going through that brick, but your Brain Spike will easily ignore such a petty construct such as mere brick.

 

Now, you're inside the base. The walls are made of plaster and wood beams. Unless you hit a stud, your gun will easily penetrate through, especially since you're wielding the .44 Magnum, the most powerful handgun in the world (blow a man's head clean off). But so will your Brain Spike, going through even easier.

 

But lo! Our target is a mage and has erected a magic barrier - Mental Defense Force Field, say, and the sneaky punk made SFX look just like a normal wall inside a larger room! His office - the GM even left him add Opaque to it to complete the effect.

 

Good thing you have your X-Ray vision, and you can easily see him. Your Brain Spike bounces harmless off the wall! Good thing you brought that .44 along (now you just have to remember if you shot five bullets, or six). Bang! passes right through that Force Wall and pegs the Target nicely.

 

I contest, fully and completely, that the ability of a Mental Power to pass through a barrier lies solely in the properties of the Barrier itself.

 

If you were to apply Line Of Sight - and just Line Of Sight - to your Laser Rifle (oh what superior ranged and targeting mechanisms the future will have!) you do not get to bypass any walls, barriers, Force Wall Powers or anything else. So it can't be a property of LOS.

 

Likewise, if you are unable to Target your enemy with your Mental Power due to a lack of Line Of Sight you either 1) shoot blind which you can do with any Ranged Power or 2) Can't shoot at all. So Mental Powers have no properties that allow them to bypass a wall, barrier or Force Wall Power.

 

That leaves the wall, barrier or Force Wall Power as the last element left. If a target creates a Mental Force wall and fails to add the PD (and/or ED) Transparent Advantage then it's going to suck when any Body is done to that wall and collapses (and the left over Body Damage passes right on through to Mr Target), but it'll stop a Mental Power pretty quickly. (which is why I believe you should be able to choose which Defense is a Base Defense for Force Wall and not require PD/ED Transparency for Flash, Mental or Power Defense Only Force Walls - but that's a totally separate topic).

[Lucius]

Re: The "Mental"-ness of Mental Powers

 

In which case, why would a power that goes against Power Defense - or for that matter a No Normal Defense Power - be stopped by a barrier that lacks the defense?

 

Or even a power that goes against Mental Defense, but is not a Mental Power? If "it's all about the wall" and not about the kind of power, it should penetrate a wall as easily as your Brain Spike, shouldn't it?

 

Lucius Alexander

 

And a Hardened No Normal Defense Palindromedary

[ghost-angel]

Re: The "Mental"-ness of Mental Powers

 

Are they stopped by walls?

 

I mean, I know everyone plays them that way. I believe that yes, if you redefined a Power to go against Mental Defense then PD shouldn't stop it at all.

 

But we always play it that way... are we misinterpreting a fundamental aspect of interactions?

 

Perhaps the Mental Power aspect that gets added is that it makes an Attack "Non-Physical" and bypass Special Effect Interaction.

[Chris Goodwin]

Re: The "Mental"-ness of Mental Powers

 

2) Can't shoot at all. So Mental Powers have no properties that allow them to bypass a wall' date=' barrier or Force Wall Power.[/quote']

 

See, this is the part I'm not sure about.

 

Back in the days of 3e, there was neither Indirect nor Transparency, Mental Powers could be targeted that way because they were Mental Powers. That was part of the properties of Mental Powers, that if you could see your target you could affect him. Absent an explicit declaration to the contrary in the intervening editions, I don't see that that's particularly changed.

 

Given, though, that we have Transparency as a property of Force Walls, we can apply it to other walls, barriers, and so forth. I'd rather Mental Powers be targeted through walls because walls are Transparent to Mental Powers, rather than "because Mental Powers are just special that way". I think that's either exactly what you're saying, or sort of but not quite what you're saying, correct?

[Lucius]

Re: The "Mental"-ness of Mental Powers

 

Are they stopped by walls?

 

I mean, I know everyone plays them that way. I believe that yes, if you redefined a Power to go against Mental Defense then PD shouldn't stop it at all.

 

But we always play it that way... are we misinterpreting a fundamental aspect of interactions?

 

Perhaps the Mental Power aspect that gets added is that it makes an Attack "Non-Physical" and bypass Special Effect Interaction.

 

It's entirely possible that the way you're playing makes more sense than the Rules as Written.

 

Wouldn't be the first time.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

Transparent palindromedary

[ghost-angel]

Re: The "Mental"-ness of Mental Powers

 

I'd rather Mental Powers be targeted through walls because walls are Transparent to Mental Powers' date=' rather than "because Mental Powers are just special that way". I think that's either exactly what you're saying, or sort of but not quite what you're saying, correct?[/quote']

 

That's exactly what I'm saying.

 

Mental Powers don't go around or bypass. But through because the Force Wall it inherently Transparent to them.

[Chris Goodwin]

Re: The "Mental"-ness of Mental Powers

 

Perhaps the Mental Power aspect that gets added is that it makes an Attack "Non-Physical" and bypass Special Effect Interaction.

 

The other side of this is, how do I make my regular Powers work this way? I want them to be psionic powers and all. Say, a Drain Ego. I have the psionic ability to sap my target's will. So I buy Drain, BOECV, Invisible, LOS. Is there something else I can, or need to, buy that turns that Drain into a Mental Power?

 

If I had my way, in 6e Mental would be another Special Effect, like Physical and Energy, and there would be nothing at all special about it. If you wanted it to be a Mental Power the way previous editions treated them, you'd need to buy all of the additional stuff.

[ghost-angel]

Re: The "Mental"-ness of Mental Powers

 

If there is, it is an as-yet unwritten Advantage. And as we delve into this, I realize, the essential point behind my belief that Ego Attack is not merely an Energy Blast Construction; but a full on Mental Power with similar properties.

 

I don't necessarily disagree with your position regarding Mental being merely an SFX.

I think it might make things more complicated than needed however.

[Lucius]

Re: The "Mental"-ness of Mental Powers

 

If there is, it is an as-yet unwritten Advantage. And as we delve into this, I realize, the essential point behind my belief that Ego Attack is not merely an Energy Blast Construction; but a full on Mental Power with similar properties.

 

I don't necessarily disagree with your position regarding Mental being merely an SFX.

I think it might make things more complicated than needed however.

 

I think the point some people are trying to make is that things are needlessly complicated NOW.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

Psionic Palindromedary

[PhilFleischmann]

Re: The "Mental"-ness of Mental Powers

 

I contest' date=' fully and completely, that the ability of a Mental Power to pass through a barrier lies solely in the properties of the Barrier itself.[/quote']

I think this is the key. And I agree, but to be fair, you can't say that the whether X can go through Y is solely a property of Y. It must be a property of both - that is, a property of how they interact. The lack of ability of a bullet to pass through a brick wall is not solely a property of the wall, it's also a property of the bullet. But you're right that it really has nothing to do with Indirect.

 

So generalizing the statement "the ability of X attack to pass through Y barrier is a property of how they interact specifically." In the case of real world attacks and real world barriers, it's fairly obvious. But Mental Powers and magic barriers are not real-world things - which means the property of a "normal" barrier that allows mental powers to pass through is granted solely by the grace of the GM.

 

The GM is free to decide what Mental Powers can and can't pass through. For example, metal might block Mental Powers. "Sorry, your Mental Attack doesn't penetrate the wall, there's too much electrical wiring inside that wall."

 

For any barriers not built with powers, it's up to the GM and his world settings. This includes natural solid objects - trees, boulders, hills, shrubs; man-made objects - brick walls, wood walls, stone walls, glass walls; even other kinds of objects, regardless of whether we thing of them as "barriers" - bodies of flowing water, people, fog, etc.

 

The GM is free to say that mental powers don't pass through fog, or that they'll pass through deciduous trees, but not coniferous trees, or that you can't mentally attack someone standing on the other side of a river, even if you can see him.

 

The GM if free to say the same kinds of things about bullets and normal barriers as well, but he would usually try to keep things realistic, for the sake of his players' willful suspension of disbelief. If he starts making wierd rulings on bullets, he's likely to lose players.

[ghost-angel]

Re: The "Mental"-ness of Mental Powers

 

You know what, I can get behind that. Makes total sense that varoius things could block a given effect.

 

I also agree that it is an interaction between the two is key and it is not completely one sided.

[prestidigitator]

Re: The "Mental"-ness of Mental Powers

 

Interesting. You know, I'm not sure exactly how related this is, but I got to thinking that if you bought Mental Defense for a Base (to protect the occupants), I'd probably be inclined to treat it like a Persistent Force Field rather than a Force Wall. That is, if someone used a Mental Power on someone in the Base, they'd get the benefit of the Mental Defense, but the Mental Power wouldn't have much chance of breaking down the Base's walls if it happened to get through. Versus a physical attack, on the other hand, I think I'd treat the Base's walls more like a Force Wall; once the physical attack penetrated, there'd be a hole in the defenses.

 

Anyway, I'd be inclined myself to confer the form of "indirectness" we are talking about along with the Based on Ego Combat Value Advantage, but I admit I might have to consider the SFX a bit. IMO Mental Powers should affect people behind walls. That's just how I see them as working, and to hell with game balance (and even system consistency). I suppose in that regard I do view them as, "special," though I agree it would probably be good to be able to bridge the gap (hence my take on BoECV).

[bigbywolfe]

Re: The "Mental"-ness of Mental Powers

 

Why would you "confer the form of 'indirectness' we are talking about" to BOECV instead of to 'Line of Site' which is what the rules themselves attribute it to?

[PhilFleischmann]

Re: The "Mental"-ness of Mental Powers

 

Oh, I forgot to mention that other "special" types of attacks, such as NNDs have their own, similar blocked/pass-thru barriers properties, depending on SFX.

 

An NND defined as a gas attack won't penetrate a brick wall, but an NND defined as radiation might.

 

If you pay for Indirect, you override any GM fiat - you go through any barriers regardless.

[Sean Waters]

Re: The "Mental"-ness of Mental Powers

 

First off NND is stopped by normal walls, and I'm confident about that because I got excited about the possibilities of ignoring walls with NND years ago and got shot down over it: there may even have been an official ruling.

 

You can argue that is wrong, but that is what the rules apparently say: mental powers are a special case, which is why they have a special rule. If we are arguing how it should be there are about 4000 suggestions I have here somewhere...

 

So...either mental powers (and only mental powers) ignore barriers they do not interact with the defences of or they have a limited form of indirect allowing them to ignore barriers they do not interact with.

 

Now you don't hear me say this often, but difference does it make?

 

What, in practice, is the difference between 'mental powers are a special case' and 'mental powers have a limited form of indirect'.

 

...and when I say 'limited' I mean 'not very limited at all; physical and energy barriers are massively more common than mental barriers, so, in practice, it is somethign that will rarely restrict a mental attack anyway.

[Sean Waters]

Re: The "Mental"-ness of Mental Powers

 

Why would you "confer the form of 'indirectness' we are talking about" to BOECV instead of to 'Line of Site' which is what the rules themselves attribute it to?

 

 

Oddly enough the LOS modifier on p266 5ER says that a power with this advantage is not subject to range modifiers but 'easily blocked by intervening objects'

[Sean Waters]

Re: The "Mental"-ness of Mental Powers

 

Oh, I forgot to mention that other "special" types of attacks, such as NNDs have their own, similar blocked/pass-thru barriers properties, depending on SFX.

 

An NND defined as a gas attack won't penetrate a brick wall, but an NND defined as radiation might.

 

If you pay for Indirect, you override any GM fiat - you go through any barriers regardless.

 

 

I disagree: building a gas attack or a radiation attack may be good grounds for adding a partially indirect advantage to an attack, but they do not allow any attack to ignore barriers: would you let a 'Radiation RKA' ignore barriers?

[bigbywolfe]

Re: The "Mental"-ness of Mental Powers

 

Oddly enough the LOS modifier on p266 5ER says that a power with this advantage is not subject to range modifiers but 'easily blocked by intervening objects'

Sean, that's because "intervening objects" can block your line of sight, just like they can when using the LOS inherent to Mental Powers. It has nothing to do with “Indirect” or barriers or whatever, it has to do with whether or not you can see the target.

A power with this +1/2 Advantage works on a Line Of Sight (LOS) basis, like Mental Powers

Emphasis mine. This lists the Advantage, but to understand how a Power with LOS (inherent or bought) works, you have to read the LOS section on 5ER 116 under “Mental Powers”. The LOS Advantage makes the Power it is applied to work the same way; like Mental Powers is even how it is described. Page 116 says:

Conventional barriers don’t stop Mental Powers

I’ll stop there or I’ll be quoting and breaking down for inspection all six paragraphs. My point is that there is no “partial, sort of, Indirect”. It is just how Line Of Sight works.

[Sean Waters]

Re: The "Mental"-ness of Mental Powers

 

Sean, that's because "intervening objects" can block your line of sight, just like they can when using the LOS inherent to Mental Powers. It has nothing to do with “Indirect” or barriers or whatever, it has to do with whether or not you can see the target.

Emphasis mine. This lists the Advantage, but to understand how a Power with LOS (inherent or bought) works, you have to read the LOS section on 5ER 116 under “Mental Powers”. The LOS Advantage makes the Power it is applied to work the same way; like Mental Powers is even how it is described. Page 116 says: I’ll stop there or I’ll be quoting and breaking down for inspection all six paragraphs. My point is that there is no “partial, sort of, Indirect”. It is just how Line Of Sight works.

 

The trouble is it is not written in clear and unambiguous language: we are all making assumptions and they are not all the same ones. Mental powers can target through opaque solids between you and your target: can LOS attacks? I'm guessing not.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: The "Mental"-ness of Mental Powers

 

The trouble is it is not written in clear and unambiguous language: we are all making assumptions and they are not all the same ones. Mental powers can target through opaque solids between you and your target: can LOS attacks? I'm guessing not.

 

I've posted a Rules Question. I think the rule should be based on the barrier itself and the attack (ie would the attack be stopped by a barrier with those defenses), but that would imply a STUN drain or AVLD: Radio Flash Defense should also pass through a brick wall.

 

I wonder whether the better answer would be to get rid of LoS range. Does it really do anything that No Range Modifier could not do just as well? This would eliminate the "at GM's option, you can use a LoS power without LoS" issue - it can be fired blind like any other attack.

 

The issue would then come down to how attacks without the Indirect advantage interact with barriers. For consistency, I would suggest the Force Wall rules should be used. If the barrier has only conventional defenses, attacks against exotic defenses pass through it. If the barrier is opaque to a certain sense, attacks based on that sense's flash defense are blocked.

[Sean Waters]

Re: The "Mental"-ness of Mental Powers

 

Seen the question - looking forward to the answer, even if it is Mwahahahaha!

 

Looked back at one of my earlier posts and realised how unclear and ambiguous I was being (pot, kettle, black): I acknowledge that a LOS attack can target something on the other side of a wall (if you can draw LOS on it i.e. you have a sense that can ignore the wall) but I do not think the attack can pass through the wall, effectively ignoring it. If the attack does BODY it may be able to break through, if it doesn't (and does not have 'indirect'/is not a mental power) it can not go through at all.

 

Leastways, that is my understanding.

[bigbywolfe]

Re: The "Mental"-ness of Mental Powers

 

But Sean, a regular Ranged attack can target someone through a wall if you can see through the wall anyway...

Isn't the difference whether you have to surmount the wall's DEF or not?

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: The "Mental"-ness of Mental Powers

 

But Sean, a regular Ranged attack can target someone through a wall if you can see through the wall anyway...

Isn't the difference whether you have to surmount the wall's DEF or not?

 

Especially when mental attacks do no BOD, and therefore cannot possibly break down the wall, it seems unlikely the comments related to attacking someone behind a barrier refers to being able to target him, but not get the attack through since the wall will stop it.

[ghost-angel]

Re: The "Mental"-ness of Mental Powers

 

But do you have to break down the wall if the wall lacks the property to even interact with the attack?

 

X-Rays in real life are a good example here. They pass through most solid objects rather nicely, but don't have to break any of them down.