4. Allowing mental attacks makes it harder to make a tough character, even with mental Toughness powers. (After all, it's harder to defend multiple stress tracks.) This causes some people to disallow them.
I do dig the "X negagive refresh = X mental armor" though. Gives me a mechanic for saying non-mortal creatures are difficult to bother mentally rather than just being arbitrary about it. Think I'll skip bothering with taking Conviction/Discipline into account; no need for weak fae to be any less alien mentally than the stronger ones.
I don't think that there's anything in the rules that actually says that you can make mental attacks with Spirit.
Mental stress I reserve primarily for the bad guys. It takes a lot of practice to be able to do that quickly and effectively (I.E. with evocation's speed and methods). Most good guys are not going to sit and break one mind after the next just so that they can do it flawlessly later. Otherwise I'd allow it as a ritual, or if the caster's intent is to harm the target (plenty easy to tear someone's mind up, much harder to only damage specific bits in specific ways). And of course its usually lawbreaking.Pretty much my opinion.
That would support some sort of mental evocations, yes. But that could easily just be blocks and manouvers.I think you're reaching. ;)
@UmbraLux: I wouldn't say he's reaching. That passage is pretty open to interpretation.
@The Mighty Buzzard: Is the thing you're stuck on something I can help with?
It stands to reason that it wouldn't be capable of really potent mental effects.
@UmbraLux: I wouldn't say he's reaching. That passage is pretty open to interpretation.
Evocation is a limited form of magic. It can't do a whole lot that isn't a direct application of physical force. It stands to reason that it wouldn't be capable of really potent mental effects.Evocation isn't at potent as thaumaturgy, I agree. However that has little to do with whether or not you can attack within evocation's limits.
It isn't an inarguable position, but it's defensible.
Lawbreaker is a weak deterrent because non-humans are the ones you most want to use mental attacks against.
It isn't direct RAW
Yeah, I know. I'm a bit of a houseruler myself.
But when you're contending that something is actually part of the RAW and someone says, "feel free to houserule it that way", it's a bit like them saying, "WRONG!". It's very...blunt. Maybe even dismissive, if you're in a whiny mood.
I'm confused. Are you agreeing with my conclusion, but disagreeing with how I got there?
Yeah, I know. I'm a bit of a houseruler myself.
But when you're contending that something is actually part of the RAW and someone says, "feel free to houserule it that way", it's a bit like them saying, "WRONG!". It's very...blunt. Maybe even dismissive, if you're in a whiny mood.
"Spirit also covers mental magic, emotions,ghosts – that sort of stuff." Your Story pg 255.to
That would support some sort of mental evocations, yes. But that could easily just be blocks and manouvers.the best response provided is
Evocation is a limited form of magic. It can't do a whole lot that isn't a direct application of physical force. It stands to reason that it wouldn't be capable of really potent mental effects.which doesn't even address the referenced passage at all, and is soundly refuted by a simple veil, both RAW and canon, I do feel rather dismissive as to the whole 'evocation mental attacks aren't RAW' argument.
The shifts of power allocated to the spell may
be split up as follows:
1 shift of power increases the Weapon rating
by 1. So if you allocate 4 shifts of power to this,
your spell is treated as a Weapon:4 attack.
The context of a mental attack is a little more
strictly defined when it comes to supernatural
abilities—the rules for the powers are given in
either Supernatural Powers (for White Court
vampires and their ilk) or Spellcraft (for wizards
and sorcerers), and the targets of those abilities
can use Discipline to defend against the attacks.
The only situation where
zones and movement might matter is if there’s
a mental conflict taking place as part of a larger,
physical one.
Spirit also covers mental magic, emotions,Since it's specifically talking about mind magic with an evocation element.
ghosts – that sort of stuff.
Wouldn't be the first time a game included a rule-set that was dangerous, potentially game-breaking and inflammatory on said game's forums, not to mention ill-defined.Wouldn't be the first in this game. :)
...both sides can be right.Sounds like a weird Heisenbergian universe!
And me, I'd rather fix that oversight than rule out what caused it.... for lack of a better way to put it- surgery is always preferable to euthanasia.If you're willing to use a metagame mechanic, available fate points (representing free will) could be used as armor against mental attacks. Could also base it on refresh if you want something which won't change so much. Perhaps armor equal to the difference between campaign refresh level and the number of points spent on supernatural powers. Might make pure mortals too resistant though. Not really happy with using metagame resources in the game either.
So, if I can redirect the thread... what fixes would make the idea of direct mental damage acceptable to everyone?
It's not like their power is significantly more phenomenally cosmic with mental evocation.
Being able to attack the mental stress track is no small feat. The kind of abuse necessary to inflict this kind of damage on another person usually takes a great deal of time and energy, the result of established relationships going horribly awry. Shortcuts exist—certain triggers in the character’s history might allow access to deeper recesses of the mind. Perhaps the most terrifying example of this is the mind magic available to wizards or the mental powers of other supernatural creatures. Even as total strangers, these people can instantly strike at the heart of what makes people who they are, forcing them to be temporary thralls to the creature’s will—or worse.
Remember that every use of this against a mortal is Lawbreaking, and should result in the attacker gaining the stunt and possibly suffering an aspect shift.
Look at the Sword of the Cross ability All Creatures Are Equal Before God. It costs 3-4 refresh base and 1 FP every time you use it. It lets you bypass all Toughness powers and all mundane armour.For the record, I agree. It's part of what makes spellcasters so potentially powerful. I'm simply not allowing how powerful it may be to color my interpretation of the rules. I wouldn't object at all to house rules against mental evocation attacks. If nothing else, such a rule preserves the WCV niche.
Mental evocations do the same thing for free. This is a big deal.
I would argue that attacking Discipline and Conviction instead of Athletics and Endurance is also an advantage, but even ignoring that...
So here would be my suggestions for Evocation-based mental attacks:I like the idea. As a mini-game inside the victim's own mind, the victim would (or at least should IMO) have "home field advantage". In short, a wide range of easy Declarations as they change their mental landscape and force the invader to fight on their terms. (Thinking of a certain scene in Ghost Story here.) Might be worth exploring in another thread.
1) Think of mental conflict as a form of 'mini-game' taking place in the background of the physical conflict (or whatever the foreground scene is). It is not simply another damage type, it is a seperate conflict happening concurrently with the scene as a whole.
<snip>
In addition, consider that the books and rules describe mental attacks as an invasion into the mind of the target, which can also expose the attacker to the mind of the target. It might be worth reflecting this by giving the attacker an aspect along the lines of "I've been in the mind of a _____" to reflect this experience. Have this aspect last for the scene, or the session, or until its used, as appropriate. Compel it to make the attack reel back from the horror he has exposed himself to, or suffer flashbacks, etc.
Not possibly, definitely. It's an effect of Lawbreaker.
Not only do I like it, but it matches (very very well matches) the only detailed in-book example of such a conflict (GS).
@Sinker
I imagine that would be better represented, for mechanical symmetric, at the least, by that poor unsuspecting sod simply having little chance in such a conflict, and quickly either conceding or being taken-out.
More than anything I think I'm trying to say that I would likely compel in that circumstance. Consider that many mortals probably have some measure of discipline. In that case given decent rolls they may actually get close to holding the attacker off, and given the opportunity to make declarations/maneuvers/blocks about the landscape of their mind they may be able to comfortably hold an attacker off indefinitely. This seems incongruous with the concept of a pure mortal with no experience in the supernatural.Two counterpoints: 1) The attacker can make declarations also, it's just likely to be harder since she doesn't control the mental "landscape". So a skilled attacker against an unskilled mortal isn't likely to have many problems. 2) Marcone essentially defeated Harry in a psychic contest (the Soulgaze). So mortals should have some chance of prevailing.
2) Marcone essentially defeated Harry in a psychic contest (the Soulgaze). So mortals should have some chance of prevailing.
Possibly. Though given the number of oddball, disparate, and down contradictory beliefs people can hold I'm not sure knowledge of what's going on is really needed. :)
Question though, do we want to delve into such a min-game creation here? We may have derailed this thread enough...
Agreed. I think I'd run it like a combat decker from Shadowrun. Those in mental combat would have to choose between acting physically or mentally. If they tried to split or alternate actions, they'd be open to declarations of 'distracted' or something similar. Which is probably why you don't see too much mental combat during physical altercations...have to protect your meat shell. Sorry, channeling Shadowrun...
That sounds like something I'd like to hear more about.
Thanks, but...I was trying to ask what effect your policy had on the game.
Do people still find Toughness useful?
Considering the power of mental attacks, I would expect people to use them all the time.Mental attacks are situationally powerful but, if the group is splitting attacks between mental and physical stress, it can make make the group less effective. Mental attacks are probably most useful against wizards, but wizards tend to have very good defenses against them.
I dunno. Based on the description of what constitutes a 'mental attack', the idea of using a mental spell to cause sleep seems a lot like the idea of using a bomb to knock everyone in a city unconcious.
Wait, what, where?He's talking about mental evocations that cause sleep.
And yet they are quite definitively canon.I disagree. Sleep attacks may be canon, but the 'fact' that sleep spells are best represented by Mental attacks that are not Lawbreaking are inferred at best.
When Harry comments on the use of sleep spells, he quite clearly references them as mental effects recognized by the Council as a grey area in the Laws, acceptable in particular circumstances.I don't recognize this reference, but fatigue spells that induce sleep are acceptable because they aren't mental attacks. Keep in mind that even if the novels use words such as a 'mental effect', this does not necessarily mean the same thing as DFRPG means by 'mental attack'. If you read the quotes I suggested, you'll see that DFRPG clearly differentiates the two.
The difference between a physical sleep spell and a mental sleep spell is the difference between "I don't know why I'm so tired, but I need to sleep now" and "I'm not tired, but, yes, you're right, I shall sleep now".I'd argue the difference is what goes to sleep. A mental 'sleep' spell would put the mind to sleep resulting in something like catatonia. It wouldn't directly affect the body though, just removes any mental control. On the other hand, a physical sleep spell would induce fatigue and exhaustion resulting in anything from debilitating enervation to sleep.
The difference between a physical sleep spell and a mental sleep spell is the difference between "I don't know why I'm so tired, but I need to sleep now" and "I'm not tired, but, yes, you're right, I shall sleep now".
Also, I'd like to point out that while it would be certainly possible to cause someone to fall asleep by using a spell to induce overwhelming fatigue (represented by physical stress and consequences), it would also be possible by using a spell to simply command the mind to enter the appropriate state (represented by mental stress and consequences), which I believe better represents the instances seen in the novels.Assuming the he underlined spell is possible (and it probably is) it would, of course, be Lawbreaking. Specifically, the Fourth Law:
Well I still think some particularly nasty wizards with an understanding off there target could create illusions that cause mental stress to the target without enthralling them or directly touching their mind at all.
Also lawbreaking on this issue is usually about control so if you just decide to break someones mind just destroy it straight up without seeking control (perhaps with an entropy curse or just illusion) you wouldn't be enthralling them technically.
As to the example you gave, I can't place it right at the moment, but if it worked as you described, I would agree that it was mental stress, but it would absolutely be Lawbreaking.
When Harry comments on the use of sleep spells, he quite clearly references them as mental effects recognized by the Council as a grey area in the Laws, acceptable in particular circumstances.(bolding added)
The stress and consequences suffered by mental
conflicts are the deepest of the deep—forays
into suicidal thoughts, emotional dependencies,
deep compulsions, and other behaviors and
thoughts typically classified as dysfunctional
in some way or another. Mental damage is the
kind of damage that changes or erodes a person’s
sense of self; suffering enough of these consequences
over time tends to presage a trip to the
mental ward, or at least to permanent counseling.
The only point I see as possibly in reasonable contention, here, is whether Harry and the Council are using a compatible definition of 'mental'.This. You can put someone to sleep, or even put someone into a coma, without changing who they are, either temporarily or permanently. This sort of spell would inflict physical stress (YS201: "The physical stress track
This. You can put someone to sleep, or even put someone into a coma, without changing who they are, either temporarily or permanently. This sort of spell would inflict physical stress (YS201: "The physical stress track
is used for stress such as wounds and fatigue.") If you are trying to inflict narcolepsy on a target, whether on a temporary or long-term basis, then you'd use the mental stress track (YS201: "The mental stress track represents psychological and emotional trauma.")
Terminology is not always precise. For example, if a character put a gun to another's head and pulled the trigger, one could argue that the result (assuming the target even survived to make it matter) would be 'mental damage'. Regardless, the physical stress track would be used, since it is a 'wound', rather than a psychological/emotional attack.
Note that the power to cast spells draws directly from who the caster is, which is why it uses the mental track. Casting too many spells without resting can seriously mess a Wizard up. The White Court's powers hit the mental track because they represent a direct attack against the target's emotions and damage to the target's soul. Wizard's magic can do this, too ... but to do so is Lawbreaking.
I addressed this on the previous page.Since I have no idea which particular comment you're referring to, I'll respond to the last page worth of your comments:
When Harry comments on the use of sleep spells, he quite clearly references them as mental effects recognized by the Council as a grey area in the Laws, acceptable in particular circumstances.(and)
I do not recall the specific novel (though I suspect Turn Coat), but I believe that particular analysis was in reference to the use of such a spell at Murphy's (not the instance of such a spell used on Murphy), if that helps anyone else find the particular passage.Without the specific reference, I have a hard time commenting. However, I am quite sure that Harry has never described as merely 'grey' a spell that does the following:
The stress and consequences suffered by mental conflicts are the deepest of the deep—forays into suicidal thoughts, emotional dependencies, deep compulsions, and other behaviors and thoughts typically classified as dysfunctional in some way or another. Mental damage is the kind of damage that changes or erodes a person’s sense of self; suffering enough of these consequences over time tends to presage a trip to the mental ward, or at least to permanent counseling.And if it doesn't do the above, then it does not use the mental stress track in DFRPG, regardless of whether or not Harry used the word 'mental' to describe a spell. Others have pointed this out, too.
Also, I'd like to point out that while it would be certainly possible to cause someone to fall asleep by using a spell to induce overwhelming fatigue (represented by physical stress and consequences), it would also be possible by using a spell to simply command the mind to enter the appropriate state (represented by mental stress and consequences), which I believe better represents the instances seen in the novels.Absolutely. And such a command would be Lawbreaking (4th).
The difference between a physical sleep spell and a mental sleep spell is the difference between "I don't know why I'm so tired, but I need to sleep now" and "I'm not tired, but, yes, you're right, I shall sleep now".And the latter example is Lawbreaking (4th). Note that if Ben Kenobi was a Wizard in DFRPG, then he would be a Lawbreaker (4th) ("These are not the droids you are looking for").
If the command, instead of being to sleep, was to jump off a cliff to the victim's inevitable death (quite clearly a physical result), would you still have the incremental effects be physical?No, this would be a mental attack to place an aspect/consequence, which is later tagged for effect. And yes, this is Lawbreaking (4th).
What if the command was to follow verbal instructions which included jumping off that same cliff?For all of the above, the command/compulsion itself, regardless of the end result, is Lawbreaking (4th). The first example is probably Lawbreaking (1st) as well, though there have been arguments over this subject.
What if the command was to take no actions, despite the physical assault the victim is being subjected to by the mage's allies?
What if, instead of a command, the spell inflicts crushing apathy resulting in the target losing the will to so much as breathe?
The end result in each case is clearly physical, after all.In each case, the direct result is mental stress or aspect/consequences that are later compelled. Physical stress is a possible end result. I could see an argument for 'combining' the initial attack and aftermath into a single mental attack that resulted in physical stress, and if done so the result would be ... Lawbreaking (4th), because the means by which the spell acted was via compulsion/enthralment, which is a violation of the 4th Law, even if the result was physical stress for whatever reason. You could place a compulsion on someone that forced them to set off a bomb, causing lots of AoE physical stress ... and this would still be a violation of the 4th Law (and probably the 1st Law, as well).
And yet, Incite Emotion would suggest that the last, at the least, is definitively a source of mental stress and consequences.Yes, because, again "The mental stress track represents psychological and emotional trauma."
Do as you'd like at your table, but canon appears to treat things differently.Please present a specific example that I can reference.
The spell Harry used in the novels, the one described as "recognized by the Council as 'a mercy'", that Harry has performed on less than two occasions without showing any signs of the symptoms of 4th Law violation (a predilection to see the invasion of the mind as acceptable in ever-more-common circumstances) put it's recipients to sleep for up to several days. That's well into the scope of consequences.I'll repeat here that I don't know what spell you're referring to, so I can't respond. If you'd like to be more specific, I'd be happy to discuss this.
The only point I see as possibly in reasonable contention, here, is whether Harry and the Council are using a compatible definition of 'mental'.And I believe I (and others) have been saying all along that the definition of mental used by DFRPG when referring to 'mental attacks' or 'mental stress' is different from that used by, for example, Harry in DF or by modern professional psychologists.
Note that if Ben Kenobi was a Wizard in DFRPG, then he would be a Lawbreaker (4th) ("These are not the droids you are looking for").