Mental Entangle

[Sean Waters]

To create a form of mental paralysis, you can build something like this:

 

Entangle 2d6, 2 DEF, Takes No Damage From Attacks Limited Group (+1/4), Works against EGO not STR (+1/4), Cannot Be Escaped With Teleportation (+1/4), Based On EGO Combat Value (Mental Defense applies; +1) (55 Active Points)

 

Say you Mentally Paralyse someone who has eyebeams EB: is there are reason they could not continue to use their attacks on you?

[Derek Hiemforth]

Re: Mental Entangle

 

Nope.

 

Entangle only lets you restrain their body, even if they have to use their mind to break free. You can't restrain someone's will (for example) with Entangle, and something like choosing to activate a power (assuming it has no physical component that would be hampered by Entangle) is just an act of will.

 

If you want to control what the target can choose to do, you need to use Mind Control...

[CrosshairCollie]

Re: Mental Entangle

 

To create a form of mental paralysis, you can build something like this:

 

Entangle 2d6, 2 DEF, Takes No Damage From Attacks Limited Group (+1/4), Works against EGO not STR (+1/4), Cannot Be Escaped With Teleportation (+1/4), Based On EGO Combat Value (Mental Defense applies; +1) (55 Active Points)

 

Say you Mentally Paralyse someone who has eyebeams EB: is there are reason they could not continue to use their attacks on you?

 

I'd say they could, by the theory that a regular Entangle doesn't stop mental powers, so a mental entangle shouldn't stop regular powers.

 

Of course, this assumes you're dumb enough to stand right in the center of his field of vision. though ... what happens if you happened to entangle him while he's blinking?

[secretID]

Re: Mental Entangle

 

Why would any entangle prevent that? Handcuffs, a net, glue bomb...

 

I would think that, depending on the sfx of the entangle, either the victim could use that power, or the use of it would constitute an automatic hit on the entangle (e.g. with an block of ice entangle).

 

If the question is whether the victim could aim with the EB, that's trickier. The rules say arms and legs are restrained. It seems a little unfair to get such a big advantage from the sfx of the EB, but then again, it seems unfair to get such a big advantage from the sfx of the entangle. I'd probably say no aiming.

 

This is another example of what I consider a problem (not necessarily soluble) with entangle - so much hinges on sfx.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Mental Entangle

 

I agree: where sfx impinges this much there should probably be a mechanical solution or cost differentiation.

 

6e AGP has a 'paralysis' type power (I believe) which may solve this. Until then I think the only way you can probably do a sfx-consistent physical paralysis without excessive handwaving is with mind control or the dread transform.

 

Anyone got a better solution? If you suggest EDM or desolid I'll expect to see your working...

[Derek Hiemforth]

Re: Mental Entangle

 

Anyone got a better solution?

Mind Control, Single Command (Take absolutely no actions of any kind other than autonomic body-maintenance functions).

[jye42]

Re: Mental Entangle

 

To create a form of mental paralysis, you can build something like this:

 

Entangle 2d6, 2 DEF, Takes No Damage From Attacks Limited Group (+1/4), Works against EGO not STR (+1/4), Cannot Be Escaped With Teleportation (+1/4), Based On EGO Combat Value (Mental Defense applies; +1) (55 Active Points)

 

Say you Mentally Paralyse someone who has eyebeams EB: is there are reason they could not continue to use their attacks on you?

 

i had somthing similar to create a mental trap kinda like the dnd spell maze except i had it block senses... all of them to represent not being able to interact with the world at all, backlash to represent perils in this mind maze, dosent take damage from outside attacks... or whatever thats called working off memory atm was an expensive power but effective and the only way any powers could be used is if they could target with somthing like clairvoyance or mind scan. but cause the power was already so expensive the gm ruled that only extradimensional powers could effect outside the entangle in any way. its a way of making extra-dimentional movment vs others in a way that costs what it should

[Sean Waters]

Re: Mental Entangle

 

Mind Control' date=' Single Command (Take absolutely no actions of any kind other than autonomic body-maintenance functions).[/quote']

 

What level would you require that at? Sometimes not moving might be no more than EGO, sometimes it might require EGO+30 (I'm going to die if I don't move...). You could see that as a feature (a sort of situational push) or not. I would personally prefer a solution less dependent on outside forces...

[CrosshairCollie]

Re: Mental Entangle

 

I agree: where sfx impinges this much there should probably be a mechanical solution or cost differentiation.

 

At that point, the powers should be bought differently. Handcuffs would have limits like 'only affects the hands', nets take no damage from attacks, and so forth. This isn't so much a matter of special effects as the power not being sufficiently represented in game mechanics. That's where the cost differentiation comes in.

[Derek Hiemforth]

Re: Mental Entangle

 

What level would you require that at? Sometimes not moving might be no more than EGO' date=' sometimes it might require EGO+30 (I'm going to die if I don't move...). You could see that as a feature (a sort of situational push) or not. I would personally prefer a solution less dependent on outside forces...[/quote']Hmm. Where I'd say its dependence on outside forces actually models a mental paralysis well. For example, I think it's reasonable to argue that someone faced with death if they didn't move would indeed be motivated to find an inner boost to their escape efforts...

[Guest steamteck]

Re: Mental Entangle

 

Definitely agree on that one.

[PhilFleischmann]

Re: Mental Entangle

 

What level would you require that at? Sometimes not moving might be no more than EGO' date=' sometimes it might require EGO+30 (I'm going to die if I don't move...). You could see that as a feature (a sort of situational push) or not. I would personally prefer a solution less dependent on outside forces...[/quote']

Well then you can't use Mind Control, which *always* depends on outside forces.

 

But to your original question, since he can't move his head (or presumably, even rotate his eyes in their sockets) as long as you aren't standing where he's looking, he can't hit you. But yes, he can fire off his eyebeams as much as he wants.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Mental Entangle

 

Hmm. Where I'd say its dependence on outside forces actually models a mental paralysis well. For example' date=' I think it's reasonable to argue that someone faced with death if they didn't move would indeed be motivated to find an inner boost to their escape efforts... [/quote']

 

Hmm. Hit someone with a mind control (Don't move) and a darkness to sight and hearing and they don't know bad stuff is about to happen (JuJunta 2000s, anyone?). That just seems silly.

 

There is no model of how mental powers work: I mean no real world analogue, just our expectations, and game mechanics. The system imposes sfx: but who is to say that you should be able to break out a mental paralysis just because you REALLY want to any more than you can break out of a physical one?

 

In fact - I suppose what I'm actually ater is a paralysis power: thre is no reason it should be 'mental' - it could be simply a poison that prevents any conscious action. Although we refer to a BOECV Entangle as mental paralyis, it isn't, not really.

 

I suppose what I am looking for is more akin to a SPD drain...Hmm...

[PhilFleischmann]

Re: Mental Entangle

 

There is no model of how mental powers work: I mean no real world analogue, just our expectations, and game mechanics. ....

 

In fact - I suppose what I'm actually ater is a paralysis power: thre is no reason it should be 'mental' - it could be simply a poison that prevents any conscious action. Although we refer to a BOECV Entangle as mental paralyis, it isn't, not really.

Exactly! That's what we really need. Just a regular paralysis - like a drug or other physical process, then if we want, we can apply BOECV or whatever to make it mental-based. It's wierd to have to apply BOECV, and then Mental Power Based on CON on top of that.

[BNakagawa]

Re: Mental Entangle

 

Exactly! That's what we really need. Just a regular paralysis - like a drug or other physical process' date=' then if we want, we can apply BOECV or whatever to make it mental-based. It's wierd to have to apply BOECV, and then Mental Power Based on CON on top of that.[/quote']

 

No problemo.

 

Thing is, though, that if I spend 60 points on having a 30 DEX and 60 more points on some damaging power, I expect that any power you have that shuts both of them down had better be pretty damned expensive.

 

The current model for shutting people down is entangle and a 6d6 entangle will be shredded by a 60 active point attack power in one shot more than half the time.

 

Generally speaking, paralysis that can't be shaken off by an average combatant in one shot over half the time is going to devalue entangles.

 

In addition, most conceivable implementations of paralysis can't be taken out by a generic friendly. Almost all entangles can be taken out by any teammate. That factor has got to drive up the cost.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Mental Entangle

 

So we are back to SPD drain:

 

Drain SPD 3d6, Delayed Return Rate (points return at the rate of 5 per 5 Minutes; +1/2), SPD and DEX simultaneously (+1/2) (60 Active Points)

 

That reduces SPD by about 1 point per application and DEX by about 3 points, but is very easily defeated by even 10 points of power defence. It requires multiple applications to acheive actual paralysis. At 60 points it is a useful power but not completely overwhelming.

 

Entangle has never seemed that great a power to me except if you metagame a bit: IIRC your DCV drops to 0 if you are hit with an entangle until you burst out, so even a 1d6 entangle can make a speedster an easy target if you hit then whem they do not have a phase in hand. I do not like taking advantage of rules like that if I can avoid it though: it doesn't seem right somehow. Even if you rule that you get an immediate casual STR breakout attempt, it can still be very effective in that particular application at low cost.

 

Your best best with entangle is to build it high DEF:

 

Entangle 4d6, 8 DEF

 

...and then pile on extra entangles to up the BODY. However, I suspect that with a seperate 'Barriers' power in 6e, the 'wall' pat of entanggle will probably go and that might reduce the cost of a die of entangle.

 

Ultimately I think the problem is this: 'Mental Paralyis' is a bit of a Heath Robinson creation. It uses existing modifiers in an odd way and creates custom modifiers. It doesn't define exactly how it works in game and it is generally a pretty odd construction. Entangle stops you moving, that is about it. It doesn't even necessarily stop you moving - it just stops you using movement powers and attacks until you break out. I know we are not supposed to put any weight in labels but I don't think that Entangle works well as a form of paralysis, whether in its physical or mental form.

[PhilFleischmann]

Re: Mental Entangle

 

No problemo.

 

Thing is, though, that if I spend 60 points on having a 30 DEX and 60 more points on some damaging power, I expect that any power you have that shuts both of them down had better be pretty damned expensive.

 

The current model for shutting people down is entangle and a 6d6 entangle will be shredded by a 60 active point attack power in one shot more than half the time.

 

Generally speaking, paralysis that can't be shaken off by an average combatant in one shot over half the time is going to devalue entangles.

 

In addition, most conceivable implementations of paralysis can't be taken out by a generic friendly. Almost all entangles can be taken out by any teammate. That factor has got to drive up the cost.

Oh, absolutely! A paralysis power - can't move, can't use (or at least aim) attacks, 0 DCV, can be attacked directly (nothing covering you), can't break out with STR or other physical attacks - should be damned expensive. Which probably means it either needs to be heavily limited, or only effective on mooks, in order to be affordable.

 

So we are back to SPD drain:

 

Drain SPD 3d6, Delayed Return Rate (points return at the rate of 5 per 5 Minutes; +1/2), SPD and DEX simultaneously (+1/2) (60 Active Points)

 

That reduces SPD by about 1 point per application and DEX by about 3 points, but is very easily defeated by even 10 points of power defence. It requires multiple applications to acheive actual paralysis. At 60 points it is a useful power but not completely overwhelming.

For the same price, you could just make it a flat 6d6 SPD Drain - lose 2 points of SPD per hit. Sure, it fades faster, but so does Entangle. How long do you really need it to last? Say you get only two hits on the guy per turn. At the end of the second turn, he'll have regained 1 point of SPD of the 8 that you've drained. -7 SPD is pretty good! And you can always hit him again once in a while to keep it going, assuming you can't put him down in the 14 turns it would take him to get back all his SPD.

 

Ultimately I think the problem is this: 'Mental Paralyis' is a bit of a Heath Robinson creation.

Eh? Who is Heath Robinson? I don't have my 3rd Ed. books here. Was he the guy who wrote the power back then? And why is that a problem?

[Sean Waters]

Re: Mental Entangle

 

......................

 

For the same price, you could just make it a flat 6d6 SPD Drain - lose 2 points of SPD per hit. Sure, it fades faster, but so does Entangle. How long do you really need it to last? Say you get only two hits on the guy per turn. At the end of the second turn, he'll have regained 1 point of SPD of the 8 that you've drained. -7 SPD is pretty good! And you can always hit him again once in a while to keep it going, assuming you can't put him down in the 14 turns it would take him to get back all his SPD.

 

Technically you get 5 point per application back, so he'll be regaining 1 point of the 4 you drain per turn - which is still pretty damn good, I admit. the way I look at combat though is this: you need about 3 hits to finish off an average opponent (assuming 1.5 stun x campaign average DC per hit).

 

Assuming a campaign average SPD (for a super heroic campaign) of 6, that means you can functionally paralyse someone in 3 hits - which is perfect.

 

So SPD drain is as effective as EB at stopping an opponent (assuming they have no appropriate defences at all): the cost seems about right.

 

 

Eh? Who is Heath Robinson? I don't have my 3rd Ed. books here. Was he the guy who wrote the power back then? And why is that a problem?

 

For those of you who actually don't know:

HR Potato Peeler

 

Wiki entry

[mmshah]

Re: Mental Entangle

 

"If a character is Entangled, can he ignore the Entangle and attack an enemy with, say, an Energy Blast, as long as doing so doesn’t require him to move, or does he have to escape the Entangle first?

 

Generally, no, he may not — he’s got to escape the Entangle before attacking other characters. However, the GM may grant exceptions to this based on common sense, dramatic sense, special effects, game balance, or the like; if he does so, the character is at 1/2 OCV. For example, obviously a character who’s Entangled with handcuffs can do lots of things, including making many attacks, that characters trapped in most Entangles cannot."

 

This is from the FAQ, I don't think I agree with it as a general rule, seems to me it should depend on the SFX. In my game for example we have a mentalist with a Mental Entangle and the GM is pretty ruthless with it, you basically can't do anything at all except try to break out, no movement, no attacks, no mental powers, only powers that are constant or persistent pretty much which are probably already on .

[PhilFleischmann]

Re: Mental Entangle

 

Technically you get 5 point per application back' date='[/quote']

I don't see that rule anywhere in FREd. Was this a change in 5ER? AFAIK, multiple applications of the *same* Drain (or other Adjustment Powers) only fade at 5 points per time unit.

 

For those of you who actually don't know:

HR Potato Peeler

 

Wiki entry

In America, he's known as Rube Goldberg. Wiki

[Sean Waters]

Re: Mental Entangle

 

I don't see that rule anywhere in FREd. Was this a change in 5ER? AFAIK, multiple applications of the *same* Drain (or other Adjustment Powers) only fade at 5 points per time unit.

 

 

 

 

No, I think it is a FAQ ruling. I'll try and find it but I'm rubbish at searching the FAQ.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Mental Entangle

 

Here we are:

 

 

Do multiple Drains and other Adjustment Powers (either positive or negative) affect a character separately, or are their effects all lumped together for purposes of recovering lost/gained points?

 

Each Drain affects a character separately — they don’t all lump together for purposes of regaining the lost points. Regardless of whether the Drains come from a single or multiple attackers, track each use of Drain separately. The character recovers 5 points/Turn from each Drain separately either in Post-Segment 12 (standard method) or 12 Segments after a given Drain affected him (optional method).

 

The same rule applies to positive Adjustment Powers, though the GM may want to grant an exception in the case of Absorption, since a single Absorption roll might “boost” the character from multiple attacks. In that case it might make more sense to lump all the points gained from a single Adjustment roll into one unit, and have that unit lose points at the rate of 5 per Turn (or whatever).

 

 

[PhilFleischmann]

Re: Mental Entangle

 

Here we are:

Well, there's a FQA that's easily ignored by anyone who wants the rules to make sense/wants to do less bookkeeping in combat.

 

FQA = Frequently Questioned Answer

[bigbywolfe]

Re: Mental Entangle

 

Less bookkeeping, sure, but want the rules to make sense? I think the way the FAQ presents is more logical than the alternative.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Mental Entangle

 

Less bookkeeping' date=' sure, but want the rules to make sense? I think the way the FAQ presents is more logical than the alternative.[/quote']

 

I don't think it has any claim on logic. Wouldn't logic also have each wound (attack which does BOD) recover BOD separately? A skinned knee and a broken arm heal independently - the knee doesn't wait for the arm before it starts healing, or vice versa.

 

STUN and BOD damage accumulate, and recover at a set pace. Why should Adjustment powers work differently? They're the ones it's hardest to apply logic to, as they tend to have no real world comparables.