Author Topic: HARP SF Psionics Question  (Read 1542 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline joel.lovell

  • Neophyte
  • *
  • Posts: 80
  • OIC Points +0/-0
  • Author
    • Machinimagine
HARP SF Psionics Question
« on: November 27, 2015, 08:52:41 AM »
Telekinesis scenario -

Let's say you have an Adept with TK @ Tier 5; 10 ranks - to move a person would be an RR attack, to attack a person with an object is an OB attack; but what if you have a person riding an motorcycle, etc...something under mass limit (in this case 1000kg given the 10 ranks) and the TK uses a Tier 5 'move object' to make a grav-bike (mass 800kg) move in some dangerous fashion - i.e. to veer into another vehicle head on, etc.

Wouldn't that still be a utility maneuver?

Related question - in above example, the Adept could use the different aspects simultaneously - i.e. move up to a 1000kg object (10 ranks @ 100kg/rank) at up to the max speed of 200m/round? (10 ranks @20m/rnd/rank)

Offline markc

  • Elder Loremaster
  • ****
  • Posts: 10,697
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: HARP SF Psionics Question
« Reply #1 on: November 27, 2015, 12:21:38 PM »
IMHO, if there is a person on the bike or vehicle it would still be an attack. To me it is like the question if I attack a persons armor dose the person get an RR? (note they have to be wearing the armor to get the RR bonus  ;D )
MDC
Bacon Law: A book so good all PC's need to be recreated.
Rule #0: A GM has the right to change any rule in a book to fit their game.
Role Play not Roll Play.
Use a System to tell the story do not let the system play you.

Offline joel.lovell

  • Neophyte
  • *
  • Posts: 80
  • OIC Points +0/-0
  • Author
    • Machinimagine
Re: HARP SF Psionics Question
« Reply #2 on: November 27, 2015, 10:01:02 PM »
Well, if that were true - that by simply being on the bike an RR is now required, then you'd have to say that a 2nd person riding on that bike would get the RR benefits of the first person, or both, or something.

In my own game I'd rule that the bike could be affected - but the driver would be able to react with piloting skill to try and maintain control.

Still, would like to hear what the designer had in mind for this situation.

Offline markc

  • Elder Loremaster
  • ****
  • Posts: 10,697
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: HARP SF Psionics Question
« Reply #3 on: November 28, 2015, 01:44:11 AM »
I would also allow a roll to try and gain control of the bike afterwards if the initial result was not one that indicated a crash or other extreme failure.
MDC
Bacon Law: A book so good all PC's need to be recreated.
Rule #0: A GM has the right to change any rule in a book to fit their game.
Role Play not Roll Play.
Use a System to tell the story do not let the system play you.

Offline NicholasHMCaldwell

  • Moderator
  • ****
  • Posts: 3,022
  • OIC Points +0/-0
  • Director of Iron Crown Enterprises Ltd.
Re: HARP SF Psionics Question
« Reply #4 on: November 28, 2015, 04:46:04 AM »
Borderline on Attack versus Utility. But closer to Utility as pilot is not wearing gravbike. But must permit pilot to attempt piloting maneuvers etc.

Yes, effects could be stacked but penalties also stack as well for multiple Tier parameters.

Best wishes,
Nicholas
Dr Nicholas HM Caldwell
Director, Iron Crown Enterprises Ltd
Publisher of Rolemaster, Spacemaster, Shadow World, Cyradon, HARP & HARP SF, and Cyberspace, with products available from www.drivethrurpg.com
Author: Mentalism Companion, GURPS Age of Napoleon, Construct Companion, College of Magics, HARP SF/HARP SF Xtreme