So we agree! I think that following the literal interpretation is the opposite of creative interpretation. It is a lack of creativity. Someone whose mind is under control is uncreative, and won't think for themselves, they'll do the absolute minimum required of them without creatively expanding upon the command.



Yeah, but you have to read the next sentence. The next sentence states how this works: you may issue commands using Simple Actions. This clarifies that sentence you quoted. The caster controls everything the target does, by issuing commands. The caster does not actually enter their mind. The caster controls it, but doesn't actually dictate everything that they think-- they simply force them to obey specific commands. You basically want us to read the first sentence, and not the second, to make the spell more powerful than it actually is.

Leave the moderating to the moderators.

d) I disagree with your interpretation of the word 'literal'.

You have assumed that commands are given in words and are interpreted by the target.

The spell says no such thing. The caster gives a mental command and the target performs the specified action.

There is no requirement for the caster and target to even share a language. There is no room included in the text of the spell for the target to misunderstand the meaning of the command.

The command issued to the target is always perceived as and acted upon by the target as if it were the command that the caster intends it to be.

Commands are, necessarily, given to the GM in written or spoken form by the player in the player's native language.

The meaning of spoken words can easily be twisted by your spurious methodology, namely inserting punctuation that the speaker did not intend to be present.

By submitting commands as text to the GM there can be no doubt as to the actual meaning of a command. If the text does not contain quotation marks around the phrase 'the password' then that phrase is not meant as datum to be regurgitated but as a variable to be quoted.

You claim to be following Occam's Razor here but you are not. If the target is acting on instructions as a computer would then it would clearly differentiate between variables and data in instructions and behave accordingly. In written English such data is encapsulated within quotation marks.

The meaning of the phrase 'Tell me the password' is clear and it is distinct from the meaning of the phrase 'Tell me "the password"'.

There are no ifs ands or buts about this. The above statement is a fact.

The methods that you use to twist the intent of such instructions are artefacts of language.

Mental Manipulations do not rely upon language and therefore cannot be 'manipulated' in such a manner.

My personal interpretation of the rules is exactly the opposite.

You are saying directing = hearing. I say directing = simsense.

Who is right? We both are. I right when I am the GM. You are right when you are the GM.

I can't say I've ever had a player attempt to abuse the spell, but this thread has made me think about it.

Let's start with the spell description, trying to keep everything to the RAW:

Well, the fact that the caster directs everything the target does rules-out the guard opening and closing door example above. The caster controls everything they do, that doesn't mean that they can do what they want when they have a free initiative pass. It's also arguable that, once under the effects, the target would stop doing anything until ordered to do so. If the spell is in effect then the target really does nothing unless the caster commands it. If you subscribe to the stupid school of RAW then this may also include breathing, but in that case characters may have died long ago when they forgot to declare that they respired as usual within a minute of starting the game.

There is no mention of attempts to break out if given a suicidal command, and no mention of bonuses against commands that don't fit with the character. As such, the command 'commit suicide' would be executed to the best of a character's ability.

Now I've got to say that this is certainly very powerful, what I'm not certain about is if it's balanced by the drain code of the spell. The big issue seems to be that people can't defend against it, to which many have mentioned the possibility of frequent background counts and similar. That strikes me as a nerf to mages in general, however, and doesn't really address the issue with mental control. Mental control is still going to be the best way for a mage to take someone out, as his other spells are just as gimped and still less powerful (drain issues aside).

As for effect, it's perfectly possible to kill someone with a force 2 control thoughts. The drain for that is 3, which is the same as a force 9 stun bolt. Both are probably gonna take the opponent out with one net hit, but one is specifically a combat spell and deals physical drain whilst the other is general and deals stun drain. In this case I'd have said that, to stop control thoughts from being a better combat spell than a combat spell, I'd have said that an extra resistance test should probably be allowed. I don't want to remove the versatility out of combat, I just want to remove the in-combat advantage over the dedicated combat spell category.

Commanding a guard to open the door is not, however, something I'd allow an extra roll for. Opening that door is probably something the guard does every day, several times. If he's aware he's being commanded he's gonna be fighting every command. Commands that his survival instincts object to are gonna be fought more than others, which is why when people planning to commit suicide go to high places they stop when they think "blimey, that's a long way down".

Personally, for the versatility offered by even one command, I'd add the 3rd edition threshold of 1/2 willpower back into the spells. This means all but the most weak-willed individuals have some chance of resisting. For the average willpower 3 character, 1/2 willpower is only 1 hit which a competent mage can deal-out, but it at-least means a GM can boost an enemy's willpower to the point that it's unlikely to be mind-controlled (with drugs, ETC).

I'm also a fan of stigmatizing mental manipulation spells, much the same way that rape is stigmatized today. People who've been mind-controlled will be disturbed by the ordeal, and in many cases develop similar mental problems and need therapy. There will be people who've been mentally controlled to do something, and not punished as it obviously wasn't their fault, who then go on to commit crimes and claim someone mentally commanded them to do so. If you make it clear that the NPCs are people, and the PC is still doing this despite the obvious harm he's doing, then there's an argument for the character to eventually become a magical threat in their own right.

I refuse to go down the slippery slope of parsing, because then you have to do the same for commanding spirits, drones, etc. and the game becomes another bad D+D session with rules lawyers instead of players.
BAH! Ptooey!
I can (and have) screwed players on their poorly thought out commands, but it was because they were either too specific or too general, or just not appropriate to the situation, not because I lawyered their command. You then end up arguing over what the meaning of "is" is...
My players give me plenty of rope usually, so dealing with an overly powerful spell does not require me to resort to outright dickery. I just let logical cause and effect take care of it.
My mage player had Control Actions with 3 IP, but the target had only 1 IP. He could tell him what to do, but it was so long until he acted the action was now completely useless as things had changed. He doesn't use it much anymore, because it wastes too much time in combat when he could be casting COMBAT spells!
I also like to let every player "have his day" by setting up the encounter so he/she can shine.
If a player is stealing the spotlight, I have found EDGE to be a great equalizer against him. Let's see him Control Thoughts with exploding sixes and extra dice!
Also, because my sammie player loves grenades (to a disturbing degree, she is getting quite Gollumesque!), I have learned to spread my NPCs out. A lot.

You are all right. Your interpretation is also reasonable. I already said that, but I buried it in lots of other words, so everyone seems to have missed it. Simply put, both sides can be right. The RAW does not tell us which way to go, we must decide for ourselves based on what is the best rule. It's not the One True Rule that the Mighty Developers Intended, or the Only Way to Read These Words, it's the rule that best serves our purposes in having a fun and balanced game.

So, we have to ask ourselves: given that both alternatives are viable, which one most improves the game? IMO, Control Thoughts is too powerful if we let it be actual thought control where the target automatically follows every command exactly how the caster wants. It's powerful enough to be able to control people and force them to do things without being able to resist.

Also, if Control Thoughts essentially gives you access to someone's mind, what's the point of Mind Probe? If we follow the opposing interpertation, we've gone ahead and deleted a spell from the RAW, because Mind Probe would no longer matter. If I could Control Thoughts someone and force them to tell me everything they know, Mind Probe would be the most useless spell ever.

At this point, I'm convinced that we're not going to resolve the question of how the spell works just by reading the RAW. There are easily two interpretations. My challenge to you guys is, defend the opposite interpretation as a matter of it making the game better. Is Control Thoughts truly fair and balanced under the opposing view? If it isn't, why would we ever follow that view?

@Dreadlord: I hear you about arguing with the PCs. The easy way to solve that is to say "No arguing with the GM about how NPCs react to mental manipulations." That's within the GM's power. This game is only balanced when a fair-minded GM who has some common sense is in charge. As long as it's a fair GM who doesn't tolerate whining, then I think my version serves as an effective check on the power of the spell. It's still awesome, as the drain code indicates, but it's not such a swiss army knife, and it doesn't wipe out Mind Probe as a useful spell.

Well, mind probe lets you know the subjects thoughts without them telling you, and it doesn't take an action for you to command them to tell you it. When mind-probing, time is less of an issue as there's no extra resistance roll every few rounds. You can also access subconscious and hidden memories if you roll really well.

Ok, so it's not completely useless, but it's pretty damn near useless. Why have an interrogation spell when you could just get the swiss army spell?

The Swiss Army Spell doesn't get you any information out of the poor sod who just walked out in front of an overcast stunbolt or a long narrow burst of Stick'n'Shock. A Mind Probe works exceptionally well on the same unconscious guy, and really, if you're going to use magic to interrogate someone, isn't it safer to do while he's out cold anyway?

Ok, also good point. But still! I think it's overpowered, even if it doesn't make Mind Probe useless. But if we read it as them doing a literal interpretation of the command, and not obeying the caster's will exactly, it is more balanced.

I do agree that one swiss army spell to do everything isn't exactly what is best for game balance, but I also think that the originality of someone using the spell should not be restricted by arbitrary limits. Ideally, the spell should allow whatever such control should logically allow whilst making the caster pay for it, either in drain or difficulty casting. In this case, the control thoughts spell represents the ultimate level of control a character can have over another. I'm sure I've seen people exercising mental influence to get people to tell them passwords and similar in movies/TV, why shouldn't there be a way to do it in Shadowrun?

We have the Control Thoughts spell in Shadowrun. In this case, it's actually more difficult for mind probe to get the same results as it has the same drain code and requires 3 hits to get useful information (beyond surface thoughts) from someone. Some suggestions for balance:

• Say that control thoughts doesn't allow such questions to be asked, instead creating an even more ultimate mental control spell with a drain code of +3. The player then has to choose between a swiss corps and a full swiss army.
• Add SR3's threshold to mental control spells (+1/2 willpower, could still leave mind probe weaker against low-willpower opponents, but means high-willpower opponents are much harder to dominate)
• Make Mind Probe easier to cast (adjust the table to allow useful info sooner, reduce the drain to +1, or similar)

I don't think a house rule should be necessary. If you do it my way, then the spell is not much more than a better version of Control Actions. Control Thoughts is the same thing as Control Actions, only they have no ability to resist at all, as I see it. They just happened to give it the unfortunate name of Control Thoughts, which has everyone thinking that it gives you absolute power over every aspect of somebody's mind. IMO, it should be called Dominate Mind, that would be a title that's a lot closer to the actual in-game effects that it has, as I read it.

I have no problem accepting Larme's interpretation as a potential house-rule for de-powering Control Thoughts etc.

I'm intractable in my opposition to that interpretation as RAW. It just isn't. I don't really have an opinion either way on the relative power of Control Thoughts my only concern here was debunking what I saw as an incorrect interpretation of the rules being advertised as RAW.

The description in the spell does indicate that you are quite literally mentally controlling the person. Kinda like a magical version of rigging, but it works on metahumans, and doesn't last as long.
Intentionally misinterpreting the spell IS house ruling it however, so don't try to pretend otherwise.

Ah, but it's arguable your interpretation is a house rule. The rules say "[t]he caster mentally gives commands with a Simple Action and the target is compelled to obey." What you have added is a definition between two different types of commands, those that will be obeyed and those that the character won't obey or will try to weasel out of.

As there is no mention of these different types of commands in the spell, what you suggest is fundamentally a house rule based on how you think it works. The spell isn't anything to do with control actions, that's just your interpretation. The spell has its own rules, which say that the subject is compelled to obey orders. If a mage mentally conveys an order to open the door, the subject should open the door to the best of its ability (assuming it is able to get the door open whilst the spell is active). If the mage orders the subject to answer the next 3 questions he is asked truthfully, then the subject is compelled to obey the command.

Put it this way: If the subject were in the military and were commanded to do something by a higher-ranking officer, then if what they do is likely to get them court-marshalled it probably doesn't count as obeying.

I find that insulting. I find it incredible that I'm getting so many personal attacks just for arguing an alternate interpretation of a magic spell. If your only purpose in replying is to make a personal attack, you could, you know, just not reply. I'm not deliberately misinterpreting. I am being honest. But I'm not going to repeat the arguments I've already made just for your benefit, especially not if your only object is to tell me I'm a liar. You don't have to agree with me, I don't care. I also don't care if you think I'm making a house rule, especially not after how well you've represented yourself to me.

Larme, your method reminds of a time back when i first got into RPGs. it was D&D and the GM thought it was clever to have us stand around for 30 minutes trying to get a door open because we didn't announce that we were pushing the door open as opposed to pulling it open. it sucked. it was the complete and utter opposite of fun. frankly, if that had happened anywhere near regularly, i would probably have just stopped playing RPGs entirely, because it would not have been enjoyable.

likewise, your version is not fun. it doesn't say "the victims become complete and utter jackasses who deliberately misinterpret every order you give them to mean something different from what you intended", therefore, it doesn't magically turn them into complete and utter jackasses who deliberately misinterpret every order you give them to mean something different from what you intended. if you control them, and they can't use their imagination, then they should be intepreting things in the most *standard*, unimaginative way possible. when you hear "tell me the password" is your first thought to interpret it as "tell me 'the password'"? for pretty near anyone you meet who routinely makes use of a password, they're not going to hear those quotation marks. even those who don't regularly use a password likely won't hear those quotation marks. to add in those quotation marks requires added effort, it requires deliberately going out of your way, being creative if you like, to add those in. particularly when you factor in that even if it was spoken, and not mentally transmitted to their brain, they still have tone of voice as a rather evident method of determining whether it was in quotes or not. in all probability, unless you are deliberately attempting to mislead someone, you would say those two statements in a different way.

If anyone were making personal attacks against you, we'd step in and put a stop to it. People arguing against your position, even when they point out that they feel that you are wrong, is not a personal attack.

You have an interpretation. Not everyone shares it. You've said yourself that various interpretations are equally vaild. I personally don't see why you continue to belabor the point, especially if the resulting conversation is causing you distress of some sort.

Not a mod post. I'm just sayin'. You're as welcome as anyone else to post here, of course. Just try not to take so much offense when somebody disagrees with you. Remember, it's the internet, and the instant you click the close button the only interpretations that matter are your own.

I've used Mob Mind a lot, so much so that some Missions GM's that said it was fine as-is recanted and said it needed fixing. The thing about mind control powers is not IF they break the game but WHEN they break the game. If done for humor or as a last resort its not too uncalled for since death could be just as easy from an overcast Manaball. The thing about Mind Control is disruption and once it gets disrupting, well, THATS when it needs to go away.

As for counters, if your NPC's are affected you have one pass to do something. Spend an Edge to get an extra pass if you're out then do ALL YOU CAN to down that mage. Sure, the canon doesn't say clearly if once affected by a spell if the recipient knows it or not, but hey, would the player rather you yank it entirely? As soon as they are affected have them go berserk or panic and do what they can to get away from it. They could do anything from spend edge to geek the mage to hitting a docwagon bracelet or in the case of law enforcement a labored call to other officers that a mage is cutting loose on an officer. You've got one pass. Use it!

Secondly, the best counter to any mage is to use counterspelling to dispel an increased reflexes focus. In SR4A things that add passes take affect the FOLLOWING round after they are activated. So if a mage in round 1 pass 1 casts mob mind, dispel his sustaining focus (increased reflexes) and he loses his remaining passes for round 1. Then on round 2 he gets only one pass and has to choose to recast his increased reflexes spell or do something else. If he recasts it round 2 he still doesnt get another pass from it until round 3 and you've got all of round 2 to drop it... again. Dope on a rope, so to speak.

Lastly, if I was a mage in an a world with dominating mind control I'd specialize my counterspelling in Manipulation and strongly consider beefing it up further with a Counterspelling focus (manipulation). The heavier handed answers are to use a ton of edge from every noc to defeat it but thats a little dickish IMO. As long as your player isn't disrupting the enjoyment of the players try new techniques to stop the player from doing it as much and consider environmental things to limit its use. (like a number of really great contacts hearing rumors that the PC has a mind control fetish and not wanting to deal with his team anymore. Peer pressure works wonders in game just like IRL.

Hope that helps!


PS: Nothing says you cant use Control Thoughts on a controlling PC to control THEIR puppets by proxy. The roleplay of the teams mage telling the baddies to kill the teams face character has mucho potential!

Here's my whole thing: "you are deliberately misrepresenting" = "you know the thing you're saying is false, but you're saying it anyway." That is a personal attack, that's questioning my motives and calling me a liar without even bothering to refute my argument. It might not violate the ToS as you see it, but I think I have the right to call people on it. I try to stay civil in all of my online dealings, and I ask the same from others. Is that so unreasonable? I give it 10 to 1 that Mordinvan does not apologize, or explain that he didn't mean give offense, because I'm right. He took the lazy way out, he attacked the person and not the argument, contributing nothing to the thread, and he knows it.

Anyway, you guys can stop attacking my interpretation, it doesn't matter at this point. The arguments have been had, see above for a full hashing out. This is the horse's death certificate. I'll just say, one more time, I agree that you could read it as being the Ultimate Swiss Army Spell. If you like that interpretation, then go ahead and use it. If you hate that interpretation, why not use mine? Instead of completely changing the spell mechanics by trying to figure out a treshold or a new drain code, why not adopt a slightly different way of looking at the RAW? I'm not saying you have to, just that it's a more elegant solution than a blunt instrument house rule.

If I'm not attacking your person, especially with a mod on the thread. I am however saying willfully redefining the spell so it does not function as per RAW is a house rule. So kindly get off your so easily bruised high horse.

It is unnecessary crap like this that is borderline personal attack/baiting. You could have made your statement without adding this and continually trying to inflame the discussion.

OK. I'll avoid such in the future. They took offense where I had not intended to be offensive, and if hard feelings resulted, it was not by my design.

You have 10 people grouped that close together.....???? 3 Max at most outside. Inside-maybe five.

For sake of example.

The point is, 1 or 2 people of every 10 effected (one casting or many castings) will resist, the rest are dead.

then get yourself some counter spelling.
Just like most mages aren't so good at soaking bullets, most mundanes should not enjoy spells which attack an undefended mind.

I suggest using those fun loving, humorless law enforcement oficials. As others have noted the spell does leave an astral signature and a lot of angry people who in addition to feeling incredibly violated are often tax payong citizens (or at least have the SINs of tax paying citizens). Those cops get paid to track down walking menaces who threaten the body public, so this will be nothing but good press if they can stop the evil fiend. If you are particularly vindictive have the cops start a file on the offending character and escalate it to a task force if necessary. Once the police get a modus operandi on the player (and those accomplices who hang around with him) your favorite goon squad can start up on their trail every time the MO shows up. After a while your player (or the rest of the group) will get sick of dealing with officer grumpy and the brute squad as a free addendum to every adventure (without pay) and tone down the offending behavior. Raw force can't deal with the cops because no runner group has the moxie to deal with a major law enforcement task force, especially one that is keeping track of your MO and evolving tactics to deal with your abilities.

If they kill people important enough to warrant such a response and are too sloppy, or rushed to clean up after themselves... ya, that works.

Exactly!!! There is a reason it called Shadowrunning.

If counterspelling is available, raise the Force by 2.
Now instead of Force 2, I'm using Force 4 and expect about 3 successes on their part. If I'm wary I'd go up to Force 6, if I could take the drain (likely physical).

Or I could geek the mage, then worry about the mooks.

If you can know who is the mage, and see them.
I kinda like physical invisibility, silence, and other fun spells a whole lot.

hi hi

As someone mentioned earlier, control thoughts is a lot like rape. Even though the legal punishment may not be as extreme as 1st degree murder, it is the kind of crime that can make even lazy, corrupt cops get off their rear end and grow a temporary sense of justice, even if they don't care about scumbags killing each other or rich snobs getting ripped off. A similar thing goes for gangs and other criminals, even though they might deal in life ruining drugs, for some reason certain things are off limits (like hurting kids for example). The Yakuza like to pass themselves off on the surface as a legitimate protector of the people and might take offense where as they wouldn't give corporate crime a second thought.

Conversely, there are probably groups that find it to be just fine by them, or even encouraged as ways of instilling fear and control in a population.

This again assumes use of the spell is obvious.
Asking the victims to lay down while you execute them, and then scrub your signature off their aura's wouldn't leave much to show any spell let alone that one had been cast. All you would see if a bunch of people who were rendered helpless and shot, possibly just intimidated by a superior force and then murdered. Also if I'm using control thoughts, alter memory and mind probe are also right up my alley too.

How are you fitting 10 people in a 2 meter radius effect? Or are you conveniently ignoring the rule that radius = Force for area spells?

Yeah, if you ignore the rules, spells are broken! What an amazing concept.

More likely you'll get one or two people in the radius, and there's a better than 50% chance that at least one of the two people will fully resist a Force 2 mind control spell, even with only 3 dice. At that point, you've taken a hell of a lot more drain for no more real effect than casting Control Thoughts. And, for the record, if you're fighting in a place where people ARE packed tightly enough together that you can get more than a couple in a 2 meter radius spell, a grenade is going to be far quicker, cheaper, and more effective at taking them all out.

If any of the subjects resist (as has been discussed, the chances get better as there are more mooks), you can bet they'll make a panicked call of "Mindrape!" or something. Also, you don't always have the luxury of fighting opponents in closed-off areas. If you're in a city street and suddenly a fight stops, you can bet there will be faces at windows. Faces that see one side of the fight lie down and the other murder them all. They may not recognize it as mind control, but you can be sure they'll tell people about it, and one of them probably will.

Also, rape and murder is probably one of the few crimes considered more heinous than murder or rape individually. It'll be the sort of thing that carries the death penalty, and public fear of it means extra lone-star hours devoted to looking into possible cases of it. It could possibly be a group intimidated, but if it doesn't look like there was a struggle, if nobody heard or saw a superior force in the area, then there certainly is reason to suspect mind control.

One of my favorite bits in the new NYC material was the reference to the prevalence of MeFeed and the effects that has on crime and punishment.

MeFeed?

You guys should see the "Magic and the Law" section in Street Magic, it talks about the specific legal state of criminal laws on magic.

Ultimate expression of voyeurism/exhibitionism/big brother. You have a real time video, audio, GPS, etc. stream to anyone who wants to check it out. Its like MySpace, Facebook, Twitter, Digg, and a video camera rolled into one. And frequently, its on almost 24/7/365.

See Also: P2.0 networks.

See my last post answering this.

You mean the one that didn't answer it? "For sake of example" is meaningless. An example founded on breaking a rule is a flawed example.

Obviously you missed the part about multiple castings.

2070s YouTube.

Ah, right. So now we've gone from using a single complex action, a single simple action (that's 2 Initiative Passes, at a minimum) and 5+ drain to kill 10 enemies, to X complex actions, X simple actions (2X IPs), and 5X+ drain to kill 10 enemies, where X > 1.

How is this overpowered again? Once more, you can get the same effect for less money, less time, and less risk by simply throwing a grenade. Or a Powerball.

The point is that you can kill someone with a Force 2 spell. Probably 2 or 3 at the same time. No, you won't be catching 10 of them with the same spell, but only 1 or 2 in 10 will resist.

Compare that to throwing a grenade:
You hit everyone in a 12 meter radius (frag), but only the 1 or 2 standing within the first meter (depending on armor value and body) will be incapacitated.* Everyone else will take varying amounts of stun. Anyone past the 6 meter mark probably won't take any more than 1 box, and anyone past the 9 meter mark won't be taking any at all.

Sure, huge radius, high damage, but few casualties per number of effected targets.

*At 3 meters a frag grenade is doing 9P, +5AP. If the target has any armor at all that damage is going to be stun. At 2 meters the damage is 10P vs. ~9 armor + 3 body -> 6P damage. At 1 meter it's 11P vs. 12 dice -> 7P. At 0 meters (standing on the damn thing) you're looking at 12P vs. 12 dice -> 8P damage (2 boxes shy of incapping an NPC).

Even if I've interpreted the errata on fragmentation AP, and it's only +2, you're looking at 7, 8, and 9 boxes for each example (and that's someone wearing 7 armor).

Actually, a little more than 3 in 10 will resist. Or do you fail to understand what a 31% chance means?

And, again, you're acting like all the mage has to do is cast Mob Mind and everything he targets instantly falls over dead. You're completely (and, if I had to guess, intentionally) ignoring several key facts:

1. It takes two initiative passes, at a minimum, to kill someone via any mental manipulation spell. It could take more depending on circumstances.
2. It's very expensive in terms of drain. Even at force 2, you're eating 5 drain, which is difficult to fully resist even for a fairly min-maxed mage. For the same 5 drain, you could cast a force 8 Stunball and be dramatically more likely to actually take out a large group of enemies.
3. Mob Mind is a sustained Area spell -- which means it affects the area, not the people inside it. That means if anyone leaves the area of the spell, they are immediately free from its influence. When you're casting Force 2 Mob Minds, it's hard NOT to leave the area in between the time of you casting the spell and the time of you commanding the enemies to kill each other.

No, a single frag grenade (why are you using frags? White phosphorous are much better) won't kill anyone in a wide open space, true. But throwing a grenade is only a simple action. Casting a spell is a complex action, and casting a mental manipulation spell then issuing orders is THREE simple actions. Try comparing apples to apples, here. You can throw two grenades with three simple actions, and even with frags that's gonna kill just about anybody. It also costs you zero damage to yourself, whereas you're likely to take at least some drain from casting Mob Mind.

Keep in mind that mental manipulation spells can be used more much much more than killing.

In any case, I'd never go for the area effect mind control spells, I'd prefer the single target versions. Creates so much more chaos.

Control Thoughts:
"You're allies are planning to betray you!"

My Mage player had already noticed the sheer unbounded limitless vague wording of Control Thoughts, and decided to take Control Actions instead, as he could see the abuse lurking within, and he was brand-new to Shadowrun! Unfortunately, in my opinion, Control Actions and Control Thoughts are too similar IN EFFECT, if not in fluff, that CT is unnecessary, ESPECIALLY given the mind-rape spell Mind Probe.
Why are there two different ways to force someone to do something? I don't get it. If you read Control Actions closely, it doesn't even really make sense. If you are jerking them around like a puppet, why does the target use his skills? Huh? Shouldn't everything the mage is forcing his meat puppet to do actually an extension of the mage's will and talents?

IMO, Control Thoughts and Control Actions work exactly the same. Control Thoughts is just the stronger version with a higher drain code that doesn't allow any resistance against commands. I think the description, how the caster takes control of the user's mind, is misleading, because the very next sentence says all you get to do is issue commands. It can't be total control over the whole mind, and simple obedience to commands, can it? You're right that the description makes no sense, because its description of effects contradicts the actual effects. I think issuing commands language, being a lot more specific, is correct, while the description, being completely vague, is not the operative language. Obviously, lots of people disagree, and I have no interest in changing their minds, especially not after seeing how hostile they are about it.