What I'm getting from my layman's interpretation of Sarah's powers is that she's the scab of an extradimensional entity who can spontaneously create illusions that solely she can interact with. Could she treat a baguette like a motorcycle and ride around town on it? What constitutes a changing of properties? It's a cool character concept, I just could use some more practical examples to wrap my head around.

It's fancily worded, but my concern is her dissociation can be activated on herself. In other words, she can separate herself from reality at will and make herself completely untouchable. Even if I've misunderstood that, the ability allows her to basically make any object do anything as long as she can rationalise it, which is pretty much completely in the writer's control.

Dunno, it's almost too odd to work without proper restriction. Just my take on it though, the GM's will do as they will.

What I'm getting from my layman's interpretation of Sarah's powers is that she's the scab of an extradimensional entity who can spontaneously create illusions that solely she can interact with.

That's not what I had in mind, no. She's interacting with with the objects (using the term very loosely) in space.

Could she treat a baguette like a motorcycle and ride around town on it? What constitutes a changing of properties? It's a cool character concept, I just could use some more practical examples to wrap my head around.

Class of object, not actual object. Sarah's not a wizard just spamming polymorph like its a school spell.

Let's take your baguette for example. Were she to take that physical object of the food category, and treat it as if it were a physical object of the automotive category, it may simulate the structural properties of metal such as being very hard, or dense, but she can't change the objects purpose. Something designed to be eaten wouldn't suddenly be granted propulsion. By altering its hardness she could hit someone with it, and it may feel like an aluminum bat (or two-day old bread), but if she changed its weight to be similar to a motorbike, she flat out couldn't lift it.

Lets look at another example. Lets say she decided to treat a fireball (Pure Energy object) like a baseball (material physical object). And, lets say she had that baguette with her. She could swing that baguette and smack the fireball away, rather than having it blow up in her face.

It's fancily worded, but my concern is her dissociation can be activated on herself. In other words, she can separate herself from reality at will and make herself completely untouchable. Even if I've misunderstood that,

Disassociation was designed to explain what happens when she uses it on herself, and to further suggest that she can't use it on other people directly. Her backstory is that her family was disassociated, during her awakening, and she doesn't understand them well enough to change them back.

the ability allows her to basically make any object do anything as long as she can rationalise it, which is pretty much completely in the writer's control.

Dunno, it's almost too odd to work without proper restriction. Just my take on it though, the GM's will do as they will.

What does this even mean? This is literally the only thing she can do, and that literally describes everything about play by post. All I have done is created a new method by which props are interpreted in writing by blurring the liens between prop types. A writer, a good one, or even a bad one, could write themselves into and out of any situation and don't need any extra ability to manipulate the construct in which they are working. When it comes to that writers time to post, they have full authorial control over the situation, and baring the actual direct manipulation of others characters, they can write anything they want.

What I don't understand about your objection is that even without the power, anyone can do anything as long as they can justify it. The real kicker is that this is not magic. I am not hand-waving mechanics, or justifications, and saying "oh it's a spell" or "oh a wizard did it".

It seems to me, upon rereading your post in its entirety, your problem with the power is that either, you can't understand it, and therefore how to interact with it; which is fine because it's not something that interacts with people. Or that you don't understand how it will affect the character in RP, which is fine, because even without it, its against the unwritten rules of RPG.com to directly control another person's character.

Though, what I think is perhaps the most likely cause for concern, that you have, is that I am untested in your environment (your experience says you don't know anything about me) and that such an indirect, or abstract power, may be outside my capabilities to RP effectively and fairly. But, I can't address that concern without actually roleplaying with you.

Though, what I think is perhaps the most likely cause for concern, that you have, is that I am untested in your environment (your experience says you don't know anything about me) and that such an indirect, or abstract power, may be outside my capabilities to RP effectively and fairly. But, I can't address that concern without actually roleplaying with you.

Not exactly, what I'm saying is that your character can (by your own definition) bend reality. She's changing the physical properties of objects at whim with her mind, apparently this not only affects her, but also affects objects around her. For example, you described turning a fireball into something more akin to a baseball, so you're taking away heat and you're turning a gas into a solid. How much more can she do? Could she turn someone's armour into gas at whim and have it float away? What's stopping her from your definition? Could she cause someone's clothes to collapse upon them, too heavy to move?

The difference with your power and anything else, is that the justification for other powers and actions are grounded in real world physics. Powers allow people to bend these rules in ultra specific ways, but they don't allow people to outright break them. If a person has the ability to fly, they can resist the force of gravity. They can't make bullets suddenly weigh so much they fall to the ground, or have them become so malleable they no longer have the capacity to harm someone. Your character only has to justify something in her mind, using an ultra vague skill-set, to change almost anything into anything else.

In other words, you've really given no indication of the scope of your ability, until now with your examples. Without that information, I'm entitled to my scepticism.

<Snipped quote by LegionPothIX>

Not exactly, what I'm saying is that your character can (by your own definition) bend reality. She's changing the physical properties of objects at whim with her mind, apparently this not only affects her, but also affects objects around her.

That is correct. The method by which she manipualtes objects is to ascribe properties to them that they do not ordinarily have, for the purpose of her interacting with them. The only difference between this, and a traditional character, is that she is not ascribing properties to herself about the object. A person who throws fire, generates fire. A telekinetic who wishes to block that fire can cancel it out with psycho-kinetic energy. A speedster can go around it, or move fast enough to create a vacuum so the fire starves. A physically strong character can just pick up something physically strong (durable) and squash the fire. Et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.

Rather than doing any of that, Sarah simply ascribes it properties that she understands how to deal with, and then manipulates those properties to deal with the object. If another character is also interacting with the modified object, they may experience some of the modifications for the duration of the interaction.

For example, you described turning a fireball into something more akin to a baseball,

No. I didn't say that. I've said it over and over and over again: she doesn't change the object into another object. She merely treats the object as if it were another object. That fireball is still a fireball, and still has all the properties of being a burning ball of fire unless she explicitly disassociates a property from it. In which case it still has the property but its a property that she is not interacting with. These are not permanant changes. These are changes for the purpose of her interacting with the object, and I was very explicit about that.

so you're taking away heat and you're turning a gas into a solid. How much more can she do? Could she turn someone's armour into gas at whim and have it float away? What's stopping her from your definition? Could she cause someone's clothes to collapse upon them, too heavy to move?

I sense some sarcasm from you because, this question reads like you're intentionally trying to insult me. I'm going to assume you're not, but I want to make it clear that's how it reads. I have said numerous times in my OP and in the response posts that the power is for the purpose of her interaction with an object. I have provided examples of how the power would work if two people were interacting with the object at the same time, as to explain how another person interacting with the power may work; but it is still only an example of people other than Sarah interacting with an object she modified for her interactions.

The only thing I could be more clear about is Mother, whom extra-dimensionally broke with her, but in a different manner, which explains Mother's permanent state of of Abstraction as it is connected directly to Sarah's source of the ability. As a support character it's Mother's purpose to create controversy in Sarah's mind, and allow her to shift from her current state to that of a heroine or villianess depending on the RP.

The difference with your power and anything else, is that the justification for other powers and actions are grounded in real world physics. Powers allow people to bend these rules in ultra specific ways, but they don't allow people to outright break them.

Your choosing not to read the specificity in which this power affects the objects Sarah is actively interacting with is something I cannot address. I have, in fact, taken steps far greater than you have to ensure that my ability is balanced, and explicitly stated both how it works, and how that falls within the established conventions and rules. If you have a concern about rules, please read all I have stated more carefuly, rather than just assuming things that are both blatantly untrue, and things I explicitly explained why they were untrue.

If you want to talk about breaking the rules, and bring up a question of fairness, I can only compare my character to your own, as your perception of the rules, and of fairness are assumed to be demonstrated in the character you've created. Let's compare not the fact that your character is physically stronger than mine all across the board (in fact its better than the average person in every single way), because I did choose to create a child it's certainly fair that an adult would be more physically developed (albeit super-humanly so).

Let's instead compare the powers, as they are the thing you have the most trouble understanding or accepting (which one it is you're struggling with, I don't presume to know). Noting that Disassociation is inverse of Abstraction, I'm simply going to reference them as if they are the same power.

Compare Debilitating Aura to Abstraction:

• Debilitation Aura is passive until its not. Abstraction is active, it is always active.
• Debilitating aura can be made active for greatly improved effect. The nature of Abstraction neither improves nor weakens. It is not something the character can just will to be stronger to escape some situation or to dismiss another character's abilities.
• Debilitating aura is never stated the manner by which it weakens others, nor does it say how much it weakens them. It only states the manner in which the player should roleplay being debilitated. Conversely, in order for abstraction to change the properties of an object I must state exactly the manner in which the properties are being altered. What it is ascribed or has disassociated.
• Debilitating aura causes a direct affect on player characters specifying how a player must role play being within the field. Abstraction alters the properties of the environment for which players may choose how they react to the power.
• Debilitating Aura can be made more powerful whenever you want. Abstraction always has the same level of power at all times.
• Debilitating Aura functions on technology that is radically different than people, indicating the aura has no defined mechanics. What constitutes technology is also never defined, and could be said to be literally any object or person of your choosing. Abstraction, by comparison, functions exactly the same on all types of objects and the manner in which it is manipulated must, again, be specified.
• Debilitating Aura directly works directly on people. Abstraction does not.
• Debilitating Aura's lack of described mechanics indicate it can work differently on every use. While, Abstraction's listing of mechanics, means it mechanically works exactly the same every single time, even if it is applied differently.

Reading your character for the first time, it could be easy to see how you as a player have created a character whom nothing within (or that even enters into) the imitate vicinity presents any threat what-so-ever, because your character's powers are such that literally everything could be weakened to the point of insignificance. Actually weakened. With real consequence. Not just treated as if it were weak for the purpose of the interaction.

I could see a bad roleplayer using this power--this field of magical awesome--to justify effectively removing themselves from the world and making themselves perfectly invulnerable, and immune to all forms of interaction beyond being talked at. The fact that your character was approved with such a power means nobody, least of all you, had a problem with any of these points.

Your character only has to justify something in her mind, using an ultra vague skill-set, to change almost anything into anything else.

In other words, you've really given no indication of the scope of your ability, until now with your examples. Without that information, I'm entitled to my scepticism.

On the note of skepticism, I'm going to take you up on that. I'm going to accept, and voice my skepticisim, and as I see no one calling especially with regards to what you consider to be fair, and ballenced. Furthermore, by comparison of what you apparently think is fair, that is to say, what you had approved to play demonstrates the fact your standards for yourself are laughably more lax than your standards for new players. That is a thing that creates a great deal of skepticism in me.

While your complaints might possess merit, but if they do I don't see it as they most certainly are not you raising a question of fairness. So, I don't know what it is that you wish to see changed, or what it is that you need further explained to you. Any notion of needing some great drawback for "balance" is really just a call for an arbitrary nerf of a power that's already been carefully crafted to have inherent pros and cons worked in for the express purpose of creating balance... such a notion is insulting. And, if it's not your intent to be insulting, I would avoid making that suggestion again before really thinking through the definitions and consequences of words used. I certainly did when I wrote it.

When a player creates balance of self, rather than balance by comparison to others, it really is easy to overlook and I don't blame you for that.

@LegionPothIX
It's reality manipulation and borderline cartoon physics, I'm not the DM. I'm not even particularly liked, but i'd bet money it's not acceptable as is.

<Snipped quote by MelonHead>

Rather than doing any of that, Sarah simply ascribes it properties that she understands how to deal with, and then manipulates those properties.

It doesn't really matter if the object is physically changed or not, if for all intents and purposes while it is interacting with her it takes on the exact qualities she dictates. It's semantics at that point. The end result is the same.

No. I didn't say that. I've said it over and over and over again: she doesn't change the object into another object. She merely treats the object as if it were another object. That fireball is still a fireball, and still has all the properties of being a burning ball of fire unless she explicitly disassociates a property from it. In which case it still has the property but its a property that she is not interacting with. These are not permanant changes. These are changes for the purpose of her interacting with the object, and I was very explicit about that.

Here we go then, this is the ability I was most concerned with, and I believe my concerns were warranted. At will, your character can make herself immune to a property of an object, perhaps multiple properties, you haven't really stated the limitations in that regard. For example, she could presumably dissociate herself from the solidity of an object, allowing it to pass through her harmlessly as if it were gaseous. With this ability, she can pretty much make herself immune to all harm with ease.

Your choosing not to read the specificity in which this power affects the objects Sarah is actively interacting with is something I cannot address. I have, in fact, taken steps far greater than you have to ensure that my ability is balanced, and explicitly stated both how it works, and how that falls within the established conventions and rules. If you have a concern about rules, please read all I have stated more carefuly, rather than just assuming things that are both blatantly untrue, and things I explicitly explained why they were untrue.

You're going to have to define interacting for this to have any meaning as a limitation. Is she interacting with an object because she intends to hit it?

If you want to talk about breaking the rules, and bring up a question of fairness, I can only compare my character to your own, as your perception of the rules, and of fairness are assumed to be demonstrated in the character you've created. Let's compare not the fact that your character is physically stronger than mine all across the board, let's instead compare the powers as they are the thing you have the most trouble understandin or accepting (which one it is you're struggling with, I don't presume to know).

Okay.

Compare Abstraction to Debilitating Aura:

• Abstraction is active, it is always active. Debilitation Aura is passive. To Silence's detriment, often. If he actually kept the aura at an extended range at all time he would cause mass disturbance to the area around him, sabotage all his attempts to use technology even further than he already does, and in general fail at maintaining any degree of secrecy. The fact that his aura isn't active is, and always will be, a major flaw of his power.
• Debilitating aura can be made active for greatly improved effect. The nature of Abstraction neither improves nor weakens. It is not something the character can just will to be stronger to escape some situation or to dismiss another character's abilities. The nature of abstraction allows it a huge range of versatility. If by greatly improved effect you mean the debilitating aura can be extended to an awe inspiring forty feet, and cause mild discombobulation, you are right. Of course, the debilitating aura has absolutely no effect on abilities, only the ability to use them, so in your fireball example Silence's power would be useless and he would likely die. This is a bad example, unfortunately.
• Debilitating aura is never stated the manner by which it weakens others, nor does it say how much it weakens them. It only states the manner in which the player should roleplay being debilitated. Conversely, in order for abstraction to change the properties of an object I must state exactly the manner in which the properties are being altered. What it is ascribed or has disassociated. Your own character's ability is literally some vague form of reality warping, so I'm unaware of how you've provided some greater incite into how she creates the effects she does. I can tell you Silence's power works by sending out waves which destabilise electrical currents, but that is basically meaningless. It was far more poignant to explain the effect that would have on an ordinary person, which I did, because I'm aware of my audience. It's in the other person's hands how they choose to write out the effect Silence has on them, and in that way, I completely void any ability to dictate a situation.
• Debilitating aura causes a direct affect on player characters specifying how a player must role play being within the field. Abstraction alters the properties of the environment for which players may choose how they react to the power. It has an effect to things in range, the same way that sounding a loud horn might deafen someone. I'm not controlling their character, so its within the rules. Reality warping however, is not.
• Debilitating Aura functions on technology that is radically different than people, indicating the aura has no defined mechanics. What constitutes technology is also never defined, and could be said to be literally any object of your choosing. Abstraction, by comparison, functions exactly the same on all types of objects and the manner in which it is manipulated must, again, be specified. Look into synapses and electrical signals.
• Debilitating Aura's lack of described mechanics indicate it can work differently on every use. While, Abstraction's listing of mechanics, means it mechanically works exactly the same every single time, even if it is applied differently. Its mechanics are actually quite clearly defined, as, more importantly are its limitations. It has a radius of effect, its effects on human beings are described, its effects on certain forms of technology are described. It is not expected to do the same thing to everyone, because I allow people to RP it however they want.

Reading your character for the first time, it could be easy to see how you as a player have created a character whom nothing within (or that even enters into) the imitate vicinity presents any threat what-so-ever, because your character's powers are such that literally everything could be weakened to the point of insignificance. Actually weakened. With real consequence. Not just treated as if it were weak for the purpose of the interaction.

Can you weaken an arrow with an aura that directly effects electrical signals, even if you couldn't infer that was its capacity from me directly referencing the effect it has on listed examples of tech, and human beings? The only way the debilitating aura could be interpreted in such a way is if you just ignored my description of it. Where-as the main issue with your power is that it is not appropriately described so as to alleviate these concerns.

I could see a bad roleplayer using this power--this field of magical awesome--to justify effectively removing themselves from the world and making themselves perfectly invulnerable, and immune to all forms of interaction beyond being talked at. The fact that your character was approved with such a power means nobody, least of all you, had a problem with any of these points.

Now you insult the GM's, who interrogated me before accepting my character so as to ensure it couldn't completely debilitate even an ordinary human. Which it cannot, nor is it described as being able to do that.

Anyway, I look forward to your replies, though I must say the pause between them grows lengthier and lengthier. I worry you are committing far more energy to this than you should. Save your concerns for the GMs, I am but a bystander.

@LegionPothIX
It's reality manipulation and borderline cartoon physics, I'm not the DM. I'm not even particularly liked, but i'd bet money it's not acceptable as is.

Please describe to me the manner in which it is "cartoon physics", as I've gone out of my way to explain the actual, and consistent mechanics of the power. As it's been described, literally all powers are an extension of, and are on the borderline to, "cartoon physics".

Please also explain to me how you have the right to rule on a character, if you are not the DM, as there seems to be something you're assuming that I am not assuming, or vice versa.

@LegionPothIX
I didn't say I had the right, boyo. I said that I'd bet money it's not getting in.

However, if you'd actually read the OP, you'd know that reality manipulation powers are a no-go.

Edit: Also don't get buttmad at me, I'm just stating facts.

Guys, we, the GMs are discussing the character sheet, as we do with all character sheets. Until we make a decision, let's not get all bent out of shape over one another. Thank.

You're going to have to define interacting for this to have any meaning as a limitation. Is she interacting with an object because she intends to hit it?

Interacting is a word that has exactly one definition.

Can you weaken an arrow with an aura that directly effects electrical signals, even if you couldn't infer that was its capacity from me directly referencing the effect it has on listed examples of tech, and human beings?

I have already stated more times than I can count, that there is a primary limitation which you did not address, and as such I had assumed that you understood it to be there and to exist and not warrant mention. Sarah is a child, and can only Abstract, or Disassociate, things she understands. If there is no reason to believe she understands an object has a property, or that she is aware that an object has a property, then there's no way she could change it. Sarah's power doesn't give her any special insight into objects, it only alters the way she interacts with them, and it is the reason Mother is still 'broken'.

Anyway, I look forward to your replies, though I must say the pause between them grows lengthier and lengthier. I worry you are committing far more energy to this than you should. Save your concerns for the GMs, I am but a bystander.

The energy I'm committing is first, and foremost, to make sure I thoroughly have read and understand what is being asked of me before I answer. This is something I would do regardless of whether or not we were talking about a character. For the purpose of this character, the challenge is trying to quantify the process of abstraction as an idea in the context of a superhero filled world. Abstraction is an idea that exists in every-day reality. The power just gives the child the ability to take and use the idea. In that regard it's no different from magic, though there remains a great number of distinctions between the two.

To address another concern: it's far from bending reality as a whole as each instance is a discrete case. The power is designed to affect Sarah and her relationship with an object specifically. While others can interact with the object as she is, it's not the intent of the power to change how they interact with the object, only how Sarah utilizes that object in their combined interaction.

You may have guessed by now that in real life, I am a mathematician, and this concept is one that I am intimately familiar with. But that familiarity is a product of my training, and not one I can simply assume others to have. It's a very easy thing to demonstrate, but a very difficult thing to quantify out of context, since it is the nature of abstraction to take things out of context.

@EnterTheHero: dude, where are ya?

Guys, we, the GMs are discussing the character sheet, as we do with all character sheets. Until we make a decision, let's not get all bent out of shape over one another. Thank.

I feel a helpful amount of clarification has been made since the sheet has been posted, and would like to be assured it is also being considered. If necessary I can update the sheet with the clarified information, but would feel wrong doing so before being requested to.

@Fallenreaper I'm at home. You know- with the foster kids and all. And the job hunting and such. I haven't had time to sleep, much less participate in much of anything. Should be easier once school starts and people get off my ass.

@Fallenreaper I'm at home. You know- with the foster kids and all. And the job hunting and such. I haven't had time to sleep, much less participate in much of anything. Should be easier once school starts and people get off my ass.

*hugs* Alright, I was getting worried hun.

Damn, if I knew my asking for clarification would cause argument I wouldn't have said anything. I trust the GMs' judgement, that's all I'll say.

Damn, if I knew my asking for clarification would cause argument I wouldn't have said anything. I trust the GMs' judgement, that's all I'll say.

Don't worry Robeats, it was likely coming one way or another because you're not the only one that can't understand it.

OK, looking at the CS as is, I can't accept it as written. The CS was overly vague in and of itself, and as others have mentioned, it is uncomfortably close to cartoon physics and reality altering, which are not allowed in this game.

That said, it is well written, and I would just need to see more about the character herself before we can consider her.

@EnterTheHero:Replied in the Polaris collab. I will also be posting Rach into Lost Haven and exploring it for a bit during the night, so if anyone want to encounter than PM me else any attempts will be overlooked or ignored. Fair warning.

@Joytex: The character tab is only for accepted character sheets.