This spell's description is confusing to me, and I've gotten different rulings from different GM's. I'll lay it out as clearly as possible.

Control Thoughts says "The caster seizes control of the target's mind, directing everything the target does. The caster mentally gives commands with a Simple Action and the target is compelled to obey [some stuff about Mob Mind vs. Control Thoughts that isn't relevant]."

Control Actions, on the other hand, says "The caster of this spell controls the physical actions of a target like a puppeteer pulling strings. The victim's consciousness is unaffected, but the caster controls the victim's body. The target uses any skills or abilities at the caster's orders, but these tests suffer a dice pool modifier equal to the target's Willpower because of the victim's resistance to the caster's commands. Controlling a target character requires the caster to spend a Simple Action; when not directly controlled, the victim may act as normal."

The question is, with Control Thoughts, when not directly controlled (ie, after being affected by the spell, but before a Simple Action has been used to give an order) can the victim act freely or not? On the one hand, the spell itself says nothing on this topic, so having them be unable to act would be adding something to the spell that isn't there. On the other hand, the otherwise-similarly-worded Control Actions specifically states that the target can act normally when not controlled, so leaving this off Control Thoughts might indicate that the writer thought it was clear that the target could take no actions unless ordered.

Thanks for reading this.

Were you at my table at Origins? I ask because this came up at a table I was GMing there.

In case you weren't:

At that table, we agreed that the lack of similar phrasing in Control Thoughts implied that the victim could not act at all unless ordered. I drew the line, however, when the caster wanted to command the victim to suicide; I warned him that I would rule that such a command to kill oneself (even with Control Thoughts) would give the target an immediate resistance test to break the spell, and I allowed him to change the command accordingly. I take the rationale here that self-preservation often overrides otherwise rational thought, but I'm not citing RAW here.

There are in-depth discussions on this very topic here on DS. In my opinion, the best description is "A mental gun to their head". In other words, they do exactly what you tell them to, but it's not like they're unaware of their actions. Because of that, it's much better as a combat spell, than a Social one. If you're looking for a social mental manipulation spell, Influence is much more appropriate.

-DrZaius

For my part, if the rules don't explicitly say that the target is sitting there drooling and helpless they are not doing so. Morover casting such a spell on someone in my opinion brings their ability to notice all but the lowest force spells into the unfalable range. Therefore it makes you target number 1.

Honestly I just wish people would stop taking these spells. I think I GM'd for you at Origins as well and I say this as no malice towards you in particular, but I think this is one more thing that people do in the living campaign because there is no GM control.

Yes. I had no trouble with your ruling - the reason I'm asking is that different GM's seem to have different opinions, and I wanted to know to what extent there was a consensus - if I'm going to be playing in 4-hour Con games, I don't really want to have a 5 minute "so how does this spell work in your game" conversation with every GM.




That part I definitely agree with (that the target will know they were controlled), and that it's not a social manipulation spell. The question is, essentially, how useful a combat spell it is, or whether it is mostly for stuff like "I command you to give my hacker buddy admin access on your commlinks" type stuff as compared to "I command you to drop your weapons" type stuff.




I just wanted to clarify that I also have no problem with your ruling, and I think that both are reasonable conclusions to draw from the text. I also didn't realize that Control Thoughts was frowned upon.

Control thoughts has always been an issue for as long as I've been playing Shadowrun. I think part of the issue is that very few GMs would ever use it on a player, because of the "The GM is being a dick" factor. YMMV.

-DrZaius

The target can act freely by my understanding of the spell. The spell can be renamed "Mind control" for a clearer description. You are paying +2 to the DV b/c unlike Control Actions, you can issue a command and the target will take the neccessary actions to carry it out-- "kill the drone" would have the target maneuver and take the best actions he could to kill the drone. On the other hand, Control Actions requires you to puppeteer the target: shoot the drone, dodge, switch guns, etc.

As weird as it is, that would seem to me like after you succeed with a Control Thoughts, you currently just have a link set up. Nothing is effected until you give the command.

Okay, it's sounding like most GM's are going to go with that they can act normally. I'll assume that this is the "default" ruling and plan accordingly. Thanks for the answers.

As usual I completely agree with Lurker and Saint. And I think Saint said it best. You have established a link that the target is not aware of. You have not given a command so they keep doing what they were doing. When you give your command they act on it. I am surprised that there are so many interpretations of this spell. I personally do not take the spell. But I have never seen it played any other way than described by Lurker and Saint. This is also beneficial to you the caster. If the target stands there and does nothing until you give a command then their companions are going to notice. And hey you have given away that there is a caster in the group. Bad thing for the caster.

As I want to clarify that I'm not really objecting to you or the choice of spell, I just personally feel that the spell is written rather poorly and is a bit hard to resist. It's duration between saves is also entirely too long. I don't necissarily believe I speak for the majority but it's a spell that I would discourage people from taking in a home game or adjust in some way (clearing it with my players first).

As to the rules problems just be prepared for the fact that most times when you cast it you are going to draw fire like no ones business and this is in a world where geek the mage is already a standard cobat doctrine.

Yeah, that seems reasonable, since once it's active it's essentially a time-bomb that will go off when the mage acts next. It's definitely still a good spell, since it has noncombat applications and is very strong in some combat situations, even if it is high Drain.

I will need to re-read the spell description again but I i'm not sure what you can and cannot order someone to complete and would generally use one IP as the guideline.. Shoot that guy is fine, drop your weapon is fine. Give my buddy access to your comlink starts to get you into trouble depending on how their linked into it.

Sadly, what I posted above is the alpha and omega on the guidelines of what you can and can't tell them to do - the rest of the spell is just clarifying that Mob Mind is an AE and how giving different orders to different people in a Mob Mind works.

For me, I think Control Thoughts should be a mental nuke: drooling when not commanded, and 100% obedient when commanded. I also think the drain, and the ability to resist it (and re-try resisting it) should match that level of power.

I have been playing SR for a long time, as many of you have. Whenever Control Thoughts was used in games I ran or played the GM allowed the first command at the get go. I am not saying this is correct or RAW; it is just how I have always played or seen it done.

Say I cast Control Thoughts to make a ganger shoot his friend. This was a complex action. So I did not need to take a separate simple command to tell him to shoot his friend. If I wanted to have him do something else then I used the simple command.

I read the SR4a and it does appear the rules state this is not the way it works. However, this could simply be a poorly worded and overlooked description for the spell effect.

I think the original question was a good one. Unless we hear an official ruling, if you need to use the spell, I would ask the GM “how do you do Control Thoughts?” The different rulings would definitely change tactics.

I thought it important to say. My argument is not "I always did it this way, so this is the correct way." I am now curious how most people play MC.

Having spammed Mob Mind in SRM's my experience has been:

EDIT: This next part seems invlid because it says "directing everything the target does" in Control thoughts and, by extension, for Mob Mind:
My Pass: Cast Mob Mind, resist drain. Sometimes the NPC's use Edge/Threat dice to resist it since it really *is* a shutdown power
Their Pass: They shoot me in the face because I'm a mage. Their mage tries to use a Dispelling Test to end whatever sustained effect I just put on his buddies/himself
My Pass: I say "Do nothing"
Their Pass: They do nothing. Combat ends unless additional combatants join the fight, were out of the AOE, or resisted it

The pitfalls GM's need to take advantage of are tactical:

1. Geek the mage first
2. Dispelling is often better than Fireball if you brought more guns than the other guy. Take out the Mob Mind'ers sustaining-health focus so he drops to one pass and he'll cry. Like a baby.
3. NPC's have Edge. If for nothing else they should burn one in pass 2 of the above example to go first and geek the mage.
4. Spread out! Fireballs like grenades can be mitigated by not grouping up


As for GM's doing it differently realize that some GM's are good at certain aspects and others at yet different parts of the game. Since so many GM's houserule that Mob Mind and Control Thoughts aren't allowed those that have banned it in home games may not know it well.

As far as making a target drool, it will but only if you tell the target to. If you say "Drool!" they will as they shoot you in the face. Choose those words carefully, eg: "Do nothing but Drool!"

If there is a delay in effect of the Control Thoughts spell it raises new problems...

Cast Mob Mind on a group. On their turn they run out of the spell effect radius - they are no longer affected by the spell. (SR4a Page 184) "Characters who “drop out” of the affected area are no longer affected by the spell”. This applies to Mob Mind. Mob Mind would never work.

Cast Control thoughts on the hot girl across the bar to dance with you. She gets an action; she was attacked by a spell. So she yells out "I have been mind controlled", or if she does not know what hit her, "I have been attacked".


----
I read that if the target fails the resistance test, he/she is under the effects of the Control Thoughts spell immediately upon casting. But then we are saying by RAW the target is not really under the influence of the spell. Not until you get another simple action to command the victim. It just seems counter to the idea you are under the effects of Control Thoughts, but you can do things I don't want you to do. Until, I get another action...then you are under the effects?

I think the command is sent mentally, so there's no chance of sneaky genie/monkey-paw dickery. They do exactly what you intend, and nothing else.

Yes it is funny how nasty little rules get in the way of mind rape spells.

Assuming that is the rule.

Here is where the delay comes from... its from the casting being a Complex Action and commanding the target(s) being a Simple Action:



On a seperate note if you want to be confused look at the social modifiers table on p131... it says folks affected by Control Thoughts or Emotion take -1 to social tests per net hit on the casting.

And regarding the 'leaving the area' rule, that's a fantastic check and balance! It does have offensive uses though like casting it on the room you're meeting the Johnson in and sustaining it until he enters it. If there is a high force ward on the room he could have trouble assensing past the ward and once in it, well, spend an edge to go first or use Adrenaline Surge and he becomes your tool before he can probably leave...

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. 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. Control Thoughts and Mob Mind are extremely powerful spells: there's nothing I can find in RAW that states you get an extra break check if you tell the targets to kill themselves (though a notoriety point might be in order). It taking two actions to gain control and tell a mob of security guards to just stand there and do nothing-- is a fine balance.

I'm in map's group, and we haven't been playing it this way, b/c until this post we didn't realize that was the rule.

Just so everyone has fair warning I will autokill every shadowrunner that tries this stunt. It is an easier and more elegant solution for me then stating up the entire NPC entourage your average corporate J would have to prevent this sort of behavior.

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.

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.

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.

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.




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.

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.

Seems pretty harsh...

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*

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".

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.

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

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.

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."

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.

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!





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?

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.

You have missed the basic premise.

Minor details.

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.

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.

GM Boot Camp.

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.

Second best post of the thread.

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.

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

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