Mental Combat Maneuvers

[Deadman]

In a previous thread we spoke about using Mental Powers with Haymaker and the implications and results of doing so.

 

Should other Maneuvers be fleshed out to include Mental Powers especially Defensive ones?

 

It is my opinion that non-mentalists should have at least some chance of interfering with an incoming Mental attack.  So the following maneuvers should be made available to them.

 

Mental Block (Mind Bar) - Uses OMCV vs. OMCV to allow the target of a Mental Attack the ability to block it.  I like this one because it actually gives a character a reason to use OMCV (an otherwise useless Characteristic for non-mentalists).

 

Mental Dodge (Evasive Will) - Gives the defender +3 DMCV as he concentrates his Willpower to evade the attack.

 

All other aspects of the maneuvers would be the same as their HTH counterparts including Abort, Phase and so forth.

 

Because Mental Powers are invisible to normal senses I would adjudicate that the target would have the briefest of opportunities to utilize one of these maneuvers as the Mentalist enters his mind.  Additionally I would personally say that Mental Powers bought with Invisible Power Effects vs. the Mental Group could not be perceived in this way and the target wouldn't have the ability to use them before the attack hit him.  I don't know if it is in the rules anywhere but Mental powers do not get the benefit of surprise (as they are inherently invisible anyway).

 

Thoughts?

[Christopher R Taylor]

It makes sense that if you allow one combat maneuver to mental powers, then others should also apply.  And an Espers or psi campaign, I'd say they make perfect sense as well.  As for surprise, it makes sense to me that someone out of combat and unprepared would be surprised by a mental assault as much as any other.  Particularly if you say that mental defense is not persistent

[Deadman]

I do see your point as to a mental assault on someone who is out of combat and unprepared.  However, how you do you differentiate that from someone in combat that has no idea that a mentalist is even around?  How is it different than the Clever Assassin in 6E2 pg. 50?  According to RAW Mental Defense is persistent so unless it is a campaign specific determination I would assume that it is on.  I am of the opinion that the Line of Sight and No Range Modifier for Mental Attacks is enough of a benefit that taking this away does very little in terms of effectiveness.

 

I personally don't like the double damage rules for Surprise or unconscious opponents anyway.  As a compromise it is a House Rule in my campaign that the damage doubling comes after defenses.  The caveat to that is if the doubling is due to something that the character brought on himself (vulnerabilities for example).

[Hugh Neilson]

Both those maneuvers make sense to me.  The source material often shows non-mentalists consciously resisting mental attacks.

[Surrealone]

I think that if you're going to let non-mentalists dodge/block/etc. mental attacks, then you must also balance this out by eliminating the all-or-nothing nature of mental powers.  The Ultimate Mentalist (4e) details this on page 24 -- by suggesting that unsuccessful mental attacks impose certain penalties on the target to represent the target fighting off the mental attack.

 

Thus, I would expect someone performing a mental block or mental dodge to a) not be able to combine those with other maneuvers, 2) have to take time to perform them (just as with a physical maneuver), and 3) for them to incur the penalties suggested by the Ultimate Mentalist if they fight off the attack (on top of any time the maneuver, itself, took).

 

Frankly, though, I would expect only those skilled in mental abilities to be able to perform a mental block ... or a mental dodge.  The idea, here, is that mental discipline should apply just like martial discipline applies to martial block and martial dodge.  If you go that route, then a mental block and a mental dodge should likely cost CP as skills (just as martial skills do) ... in which case I wouldn't think the penalty for fighting off the attack should be levied since the character is plying a skill for which s/he paid ... to represent a mental discipline s/he has akin to a martial discipline a martial artist has.

[zslane]

Resisting mental attacks is already represented by the initial 0-phase opportunity for the target to break free using an EGO Roll. If they have the sort of psychic training that would permit a "Mental Dodge", then they should have either extra EGO (higher MCV and higher EGO Rolls) or CSLs with mental combat. This makes more sense to me since sensing the attack should only be possible after the attack has begun (i.e., the attack roll has been made) anyway.

[Surrealone]

zslane,

That's a good point about the Breakout Roll. 

 

Deadman,

Would your system allow both the Breakout Roll -and- the mental block/dodge?  If so, that seems like you're giving the target 2 chances to avoid the mental attack, which begs the question of whether you will give the equivalent of the Breakout Roll to folks for use in Melee and Ranged combat, too ... so that those forms of combat also get 2 potential changes to avoid the attack should someone wish to block or dodge after such an equivalent roll is made.  (You've got to balance it out, right?)

 

Thoughts?

[Christopher R Taylor]

However, how you do you differentiate that from someone in combat that has no idea that a mentalist is even around?

 

 

I figure in combat you're will is steeled to fight, you're alert and defending yourself and looking for threats, so you can't be surprised unless something really impressive happens (just like surprise in combat with any other attack).  At least that's how I'd justify it

[Deadman]

I think that if you're going to let non-mentalists dodge/block/etc. mental attacks, then you must also balance this out by eliminating the all-or-nothing nature of mental powers.  The Ultimate Mentalist (4e) details this on page 24 -- by suggesting that unsuccessful mental attacks impose certain penalties on the target to represent the target fighting off the mental attack.

 

Thus, I would expect someone performing a mental block or mental dodge to a) not be able to combine those with other maneuvers, 2) have to take time to perform them (just as with a physical maneuver), and 3) for them to incur the penalties suggested by the Ultimate Mentalist if they fight off the attack (on top of any time the maneuver, itself, took).

 

Frankly, though, I would expect only those skilled in mental abilities to be able to perform a mental block ... or a mental dodge.  The idea, here, is that mental discipline should apply just like martial discipline applies to martial block and martial dodge.  If you go that route, then a mental block and a mental dodge should likely cost CP as skills (just as martial skills do) ... in which case I wouldn't think the penalty for fighting off the attack should be levied since the character is plying a skill for which s/he paid ... to represent a mental discipline s/he has akin to a martial discipline a martial artist has.

 

Well first the Block or Dodge would be the same as if it was a physical attack in that it would essentially take the place of an attack.  Other than that I don't see that any concession is needed.  Mental Attacks already have a +2 Advantage on all other attacks in that they are inherently Line of Sight (+1/2), No Range Modifier (+1/2) and Fully Invisible to all but Mental Senses (+1) and this doesn't even mention the cheaper cost and generally lower defenses of people with regard to DMCV and Mental Defense.  Truth be told they are already way out of balance and smart players can readily take advantage of this.  No, I would say that adding the Block and Dodge Maneuver goes a very short way to actually trying to level the already unbalanced field.

 

Generally speaking Mentalists run around with at least a good 4 point advantage on other archetypes with regard to OMCV/DMCV so I don't feel it unbalancing at all to let a normal character give up an attack to try to dodge or block.  As I said before, it also give characters a reason to at least HAVE OMCV.  As for the all or nothing nature, this is tempered by what the Mentalist chooses to do.  If they are greedy and always looking for the +30 effect on Mind Control then sure they may be disappointed when a target breaks out on his 0 Phase action.  However, if they are smart and use their powers wisely they are almost guaranteed success on the lion's share of their attacks.  Even their direct damage attack Mental Blast has a huge advantage over standard attacks.  Not only does it hit more frequently but in most cases will deal more damage per hit than a comparable standard attack.

 

I love examples...

 

In many campaigns the average OCV/DCV hover around the 9 range with attacks in the 60 Active Point area and defenses around 30/30 or so.  In contrast DMCVs tend to be no more than 5 in most cases and Mental Defense, if present, may be about 10. So what you have is about a 65% chance of hitting with a physical attack with Damage of about 12 STUN.  On the Mentalist side they will have a >90% chance of hitting with about the same STUN (11 if MD=10).  This must also take into account that they get no Range penalty and can launch attacks from anywhere they can see the target.  The damage looks pretty balanced but the chance to hit!  Wow!  The problem with Mentalists is they generally don't have a high DCV and probably have rather low physical defenses but yet they have the opportunity to Dodge or Block an incoming physical attack.  Shouldn't a target of their powers have the same ability?

 

YMMV,

 

Deadman

[Hugh Neilson]

I think that if you're going to let non-mentalists dodge/block/etc. mental attacks, then you must also balance this out by eliminating the all-or-nothing nature of mental powers.  The Ultimate Mentalist (4e) details this on page 24 -- by suggesting that unsuccessful mental attacks impose certain penalties on the target to represent the target fighting off the mental attack.

The Mentalist himself can eliminate the All or Nothing nature of his mental powers by making them Cumulative. In fact, one thought I have had (expressed for 6e) was to make all mental attacks 10 points per 1d6, but fully Cumulative (the cost is equivalent to Cumulative with an 8x cap, so close enough). That would remove the binary nature of mental powers, but they would also lose the "1 hit KO" aspect they presently possess.

 

Thus, I would expect someone performing a mental block or mental dodge to a) not be able to combine those with other maneuvers, 2) have to take time to perform them (just as with a physical maneuver), and 3) for them to incur the penalties suggested by the Ultimate Mentalist if they fight off the attack (on top of any time the maneuver, itself, took).

I read 1 and 2 as implicit in adding these to Combat Maneuvers. I don't see 3 as necessary at all.

 

Frankly, though, I would expect only those skilled in mental abilities to be able to perform a mental block ... or a mental dodge.  The idea, here, is that mental discipline should apply just like martial discipline applies to martial block and martial dodge.

I think you could have improved Mental Block and Mental Dodge as part of a Mental Martial Arts package. Anyone can use a basic Block and a basic Dodge, and the source material shows plenty of non-mentalists concentrating hard to counter mental attacks, so the idea of maneuvers to do so makes sense to me. It seems no more "overpowered" than the ability to use an action to boost physical DCV or use OCV to block an incoming physical attack.