[X] My Assistant

[UmaroVI]

This does give Mob Mind interesting potential as an anti-melee spell. Cast it centered on yourself, then as soon as anyone tries to melee you, your next action can order them to drop their weapons and dance the macarena.

[SaintHax]

Yeah, probably the more "reliable" way to get it to work in combat is to cast it at the end of a pass, then use Edge to go first in the next pass and issue an order, since as pointed out people will just run out of it otherwise.

Assuming the targets are aware they are being Thought Controlled-- which makes no sense to me-- they then are going to run out of a variable sized, invisible area of effect that they don't know where it's centered. That's if they know it's the AoE version, and not a single target LoS variant. There is more than a little meta-gaming going on here.

[map]

There's nothing that states you know you are under Control Action when it succeeds-- or fails for that matter, but that's another ball of wax.

I am still looking, but I do not see anything stating you know you were affected by ANY spell except in specific descriptions (ie Mind Probe). Still looking.

If you look at Mind Probe (pg. 207) it specifically says that the target knows it's being mind probed-- this is absent from Control Thoughts description.

Mind Probe is a detect spell. SR4a page 185 - "A magician who is actively Counterspelling can even defend against spells she is unaware of - specifically, Detection and Illusion spells" This implies Detect spells are not usually detectable, thus the added entry into Mind Probe, letting you know MP is is detectable.

[Bull]

I always apply the "Noticing Spell Casting" rules for Mind Control type spells, and that's how I'd rule it. So unless you can pull off Force 1 or 2 spells, your target will likely know something happened. He may not know who did it, if you're careful, but he will know something happened.

[Redjack]

Just so everyone has fair warning I will autokill every shadowrunner that tries this stunt.

Seems pretty harsh...

[LurkerOutThere]

Not really, it is about a reasonable expectations of the universe and the consequences therein. Most J's are going to know what sort of people they are dealing with including the potential for Mages to be involved in negotiation. That means it's reasonable to assume even though it's not often explicitly stated that they have taken basic precautions. A J (or anyone else for that matter) who finds a mage attempting to use control thoughts on them is likely to take it as the highest level of unprofessional conduct a, a threat to the entire framework of the Shadowrunning system. It becomes in everyone's best interest both in universe and as a GM to come down on this sort of behavior HARD. Honestly how well do PC"s take it when they find out their minds and actions have been messed with. That's why some people hate Something Completely Different so damn much, because it basically begins with "LOL MINDSCREW". Why would the NPC's take it any different or not have some level in protections in place. Now we can either stat up a protective security detail for every Johnson including a hacker, wired bodyguards, and a combat mage with counterspelling and statted up oncall spirits or we can make some reasonable assumptions.

Secondly it goes to a personal mentality, don't game the mission just because it's a mission and likely won't have built in consequences for a particular brand of off the rails stupid. Most of us get that if we pulled such actions there might be long term consequences for our characters, missions doesn't have that. Some people can and do see this as a license to go nuts, some times you have to remind them that there are those in the setting with bigger and better guns.


*Tosses the soap box away*

[Redjack]

Playing and running Shadowrun (Missions or otherwise) are about having fun. If you disagree, I assert that you have missed the basic premise.

You dialog does not support the assertion that you as a Missions GM should "autokill" PCs. Furthermore, it is not "reasonable" that a Missions GM would "autokill" characters. There are other ways to deal with players who are disruptive to your preconceived storyline than "autokill".

[Wasabi]

We've had SRM games paralyzed with laughter by two PC mind controlling mages using Alter Memory in a 'catch and release' program to accomplish the goal of the mission. The GM took to laughter as well.

The key to keeping Mind Control from hurting other PC's fun is to just ask them. Sometimes they have replied to me with 'No, not just yet' and when the PC's dont want Mind Control be a good sport and don't start driving the train. IMO, if as a GM you want to autokill someone then you should relieve your stress level with some other outlet than entertaining others.

[Wraith235]

the Control Thoughts / Mob Mind are by far my least favorite spells in the game

one thing that people arent doing is Reading the other spells that are similar ....

Control actions / mob control


the differences are subtle yet large

I'll try to paraphrase the differences

Control actions controls the physical actions of the target like a puppeteer pulling strings. the victims conciousness is unaffected
Control thoughts siezes the mind

yes the spells are poorly written ....and I agree about the Suicide resistance test .... but nothing in the Mental manipulation spell heading allows for anything like that

Personally Id like to see these spells outright banned from missions games

if you want to use mind control as a social spell then May I direct you twords the "Influence" spell

[Grinder]

Why is this thread in the SRM board? Is it not relevant outside of the Missons-context?

[DireRadiant]

Why is this thread in the SRM board? Is it not relevant outside of the Missons-context?

OP was at asking question based on Origins SRM event.

[UmaroVI]

Yeah, basically, I was more interested in "how will Missions GMs generally rule this spell functions" rather than "how should I houserule this spell to function."

[Grinder]

Wasn't clear to me that the question came up during a Missions game. If you're fine with the answers and opinions you got so far, everything's fine. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

[LurkerOutThere]

Playing and running Shadowrun (Missions or otherwise) are about having fun. If you disagree, I assert that you have missed the basic premise.

Your argument is flawed in the specific theoretical scenario one of two things occurs.

Mind Control Successfull:
Mage: Pay us all the money you would have paid us for this mission plus whatever else you have.
Johnson: Yes mashtur.
Face: Why am i even here again?
GM: Ok looks like game's over, thanks for playing guys.

Man that sure what fun right?


Mind Control Failure:
Mage: Pay us all the money you would have paid us for this mission plus whatever else you have.
Johnson: Slot off frag face *initiative*
GM: Ok now we have either the J is dead or at the very least likely doesn't want to work with you all. Thanks for playing guys.
Rest of the table: Geee thanks Mr. Mage!

You dialog does not support the assertion that you as a Missions GM should "autokill" PCs. Furthermore, it is not "reasonable" that a Missions GM would "autokill" characters. There are other ways to deal with players who are disruptive to your preconceived storyline than "autokill".

Perhaps autokill is a bit harsh but to do otherwise would give our theoretical mind melter more unilateral spotlight for their boneheaded actions as we roll out either the almost certain combat in the case of failure or hell even success because it's not like the J will never figure out what happened.. Some people won't like GM fiating that there just happens to be a sec mage standing right there to provide spell defense. Some people don't like the GM telling them they just can't flat out do something because it will spoil the mod for the other 5 people at the table. Most people would know that trying to mindcontrol the potential employer will one way or another end the specific mission. I think this is the sort of scenario that will only happen in missions because folks get into a bit of a no consquences mentality. Basically a GM has some tools to deal with problem players and characters but none of them are actually in the modules. In order to preserve the play for the other 5 or so people at the table from Mr. Sooper Dooper mind mage you are basically down to letting them run the table, potentially ruining everyone else fun and frankly being suspension of disbelief snapping or just GM asking them to step away from the table. None are good options because this sort of thing really shouldn't happen in the context of the setting most times. Mind control spells, especially mass effect ones should not be something casually used as a replacement for social skills.

Grinder: As others have said the thread specifically deals with consistency at missions tables, not the game as a whole. But i'm sure we could just move every missions thread to the main board if you like?

[Wasabi]

You dont have to have mind control to be inconsiderate. All players should be considerate of 'fun factor' of the other players. Mind Control mages are no exception.
Mind Control makes messy situations as does a Panther Cannon pointed at the Johnson's head. The playstyle, not the tool, make for selfish and inconsiderate gameplay.

[Redjack]

Playing and running Shadowrun (Missions or otherwise) are about having fun. If you disagree, I assert that you have missed the basic premise.

Your argument is flawed in the specific theoretical scenario one of two things occurs.

You have missed the basic premise.

[Grinder]

Minor details. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/grinbig.gif)

[DireRadiant]

There's something about "Mind Control" that just gets a reaction. If a player wants to abrogate the social contract to not have fun at a Mission game all it takes is their decision to do so. The game can be ended with something as simple as a few words, or even keeping quiet. And that is the players privilege. Because if they don't have the choice to screw up the game, then they have no choice. Choo Choo.

Mind Control destroying the game is no different then an Uncouth character negotiating, a Hacker exploiting the Johnson's comm, a bored street sam shooting a random civilian in the face or a myriad other decisions.

Personally I find Mind Control a perfectly fine spell. With great power comes great responsibility. The players who use it must think carefully about how to use it. Because it will have powerful effects, and with powerful effects come powerful consequences. Having these situations come up in a game are what I find most challenging and rewarding to deal with, whether it's Mind Control or few hundred kilos of explosives.

[Redjack]

Yea I should just let it go, but I guess I had expectations that a Missions GM would seek alternatives to one disruptive player that would retain a fun game for everyone else. The same could be said for the players that undermine the game at the expense of the other people at the table. I also wish people would not play Mind Control and Possession characters as they generally tend to be disruptive to the game.

The entire conversation does bring into light some of the boundaries/control issues within a living campaign with multiple GM's. A lack of consistent expectations can be hard to adapt to.

[DireRadiant]

GM Boot Camp.

[Redjack]

With great power comes great responsibility. The players who use it must think carefully about how to use it. Because it will have powerful effects, and with powerful effects come powerful consequences. Having these situations come up in a game are what I find most challenging and rewarding to deal with, whether it's Mind Control or few hundred kilos of explosives.

This is probably the best analogy of the thread. Especially in a Missions game where the GM and players are generally unknown, it takes a conscious effort to insure everyone at the table has fun and that potentially overwhelming elements don't damage that.

GM Boot Camp.

Second best post of the thread. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

[LurkerOutThere]

Yea I should just let it go, but I guess I had expectations that a Missions GM would seek alternatives to one disruptive player that would retain a fun game for everyone else. The same could be said for the players that undermine the game at the expense of the other people at the table. I also wish people would not play Mind Control and Possession characters as they generally tend to be disruptive to the game.

The entire conversation does bring into light some of the boundaries/control issues within a living campaign with multiple GM's. A lack of consistent expectations can be hard to adapt to.

We are in agreement on what should happen, we are in disagreement on how it should happen. That is a bridge that is not going to be crossed uniformly without some serious campaign level guidelines.

Dire: Do these instances regularly occur at your games? Do you have the J's and the people around not react in any way to their base behavior? The problem at least in my mind is this: A hacker who hacks the J's comlink will hopefully not get caught or some of the same consquences occur, a uncouth character attempting to negotiate can be told to shut up or leave (the in game) table. A street sam who shoots random strangers at the initial meet might be penalized monetarily for his indescretion as now the emet has to relocate. These are all more or less scenarios that can be worked around. What's very hard to work around are players physically or magically attacking their J at the initial meet which is essentially what mind control is.

As to GM boot camp I cannot help but feel a little annoyed as you are quickly running into a "those who cannot do" situation, tell us oh great Redjack! How would you solve this sort of problem player with minimal disruption to the other players short of an out of character denial. What is your great and ellegant solution for one someone at a con game decides their going to provoke a combat with the person whose going to hire the team for the rest of the adventure, in the process casting the same spell on the other PC's at the table. Remember that adding a dice rolled out combat has the potential to produce a long module over time but to have their employer not respond at all seems rather inappropriate for the campaign setting.

People can have fun playing space invaders, that doesn't mean that their playing Shadowrun. A GM has a twofold obligation, to provide fun for the players but also provide a Shadowrun game. Finding the right mix is important.

[BlueMax]

GM Boot Camp.

Where do I sign up?

If you could title it something "Modern Development Methodology" or "Beyond the Waterfall", I could trick work into paying.


BlueMax

[DireRadiant]

Where do I sign up?

If you could title it something "Modern Development Methodology" or "Beyond the Waterfall", I could trick work into paying.


BlueMax

2 Slots at the same time, or 2 GMs running it. Friday 8/6/2010 from noon till 2 PM at GenCon.

WKS1010897 Catalyst Game Labs GM Boot Camp 101 Learn how to be a more effective GM, how to deal with disruptive personalities, and how to ensure that everyone has a good time. Shadowrun 8/6/10 12:00 2 8/6/10 14:00 2 Marriott Indiana Blrm B Alex "Grendel" Lam

WKS1010897 Catalyst Game Labs GM Boot Camp 101 Learn how to be a more effective GM, how to deal with disruptive personalities, and how to ensure that everyone has a good time. Shadowrun 8/6/10 12:00 2 8/6/10 14:00 2 Marriott Indiana Blrm B David Dashifen Keys

[BlueMax]

2 Slots at the same time, or 2 GMs running it. Friday 8/6/2010 from noon till 2 PM at GenCon.

WKS1010897 Catalyst Game Labs GM Boot Camp 101 Learn how to be a more effective GM, how to deal with disruptive personalities, and how to ensure that everyone has a good time. Shadowrun 8/6/10 12:00 2 8/6/10 14:00 2 Marriott Indiana Blrm B Alex "Grendel" Lam

WKS1010897 Catalyst Game Labs GM Boot Camp 101 Learn how to be a more effective GM, how to deal with disruptive personalities, and how to ensure that everyone has a good time. Shadowrun 8/6/10 12:00 2 8/6/10 14:00 2 Marriott Indiana Blrm B David Dashifen Keys

See, words like Game prevent me from swindling work into paying for the trip. Will any of these be recorded for a VOD (Video On Demand) presentation?

BlueMax
/at work, so his mind is at work