spamming CS 2.0 : Magic Pigeon, meet Memory Bank

[Axelmania]

Previously someone came up with the ideas of sending magic pigeons to deliver messages throughought the CS, flying around after hard-to-pinpoint targets (ie "fly in circles until you see Karl Prosek and tell him he is a poopy pants" leading them to circle for months.

This would lead to psi-hounds sensing active spells, in a constant state of alert and perhaps confusing them about detecting more important spells.

With that in mind, when I was reading the spell section and came across Memory Bank, it occurred to me that could also be useful.

It has a range of touch, so you can't just walk into chi-town or it's burbs and safely spam it (sending in pigeons from miles away is safer) but there is the option of basically planting Memory Banks in every random human you come across (in hopes some of them will encounter the CS) so that the CS will be on high alert with all new humans entering their territories (psi-hounds sensing an active spell upon them) to create hostility with the CS.

A mage could just go around shaking hands and planting pointless information ("101 Dalmatians is a cool movie!") in people's minds (lasting months) to make them detected as an active spell.

To stop that Vanguard might try to intercept people subjected to that and basically Negate Magic against any non-vanguard who they find to have active spells. Perhaps they even have some of their psychic agents infiltrating psi-net to get them intel on people who might need that NM service.

Plus the option I've mentioned in another thread of them recruiting the BTS nega-psychics who can use NM equivalent to stop already-cast spells.

[Orin J.]

given the incredibly small effect of the spell, i don't think memory bank would register under casual investigation (it might actually not register at all given the high background magic in rifts...) let alone have any chance as functioning as a decoy. it might be useful for making the ISS waste time harassing innocent people to sour them on the CS i guess but you don't seem to have a good idea with it to me.

[Axelmania]

given the incredibly small effect of the spell,
i don't think memory bank would register under casual investigation
(it might actually not register at all given the high background magic in rifts...)

From what I've seen, Psi-Stalker and Psi-Hound sensing abilities don't really seem to distinguish between the level/PPE going into a spell and sensing it.

I do like your idea though and it would be cool to adopt some kind of house rule like to give a +% skill bonus equal to the spell level.

That doesn't always correlate to PPE cost (I think some 2nd level spells cost higher PPE than some 1st level ones) so maybe something like 1/10 the PPE cost as a skill bonus too?

Memory Bank isn't cheap or low level though so I don't know if that would lead to it being hard to detect compared to lots of other spells.

it might be useful for making the ISS waste time harassing innocent people to sour them on the CS i guess
but you don't seem to have a good idea with it to me.

Your opposition to it seems based on the idea that Psi-Hounds for some reason would have trouble detecting this active magic compared to other active magic, but why?

[Orin J.]

i'm not sold on the idea it's enchanting the person being used to store the memory. you could do the same thing with hypnosis (the skill, not the psionic power, it's possible to hypnotise people into recalling something but not be aware they know it until called forth again) so i think the magic isn't the stored memory itself, just the ability to insert it and recall it without having to put the victim through an intense session of hypnosis. the fact the mage isn't casting the spell to activate it again makes me think it's really being cast on the mage themselves to be able to draw the hidden memory out at will since there's no way to dispel it but you can stop it with a mind block.

[Axelmania]

i'm not sold on the idea it's enchanting the person being used to store the memory.
you could do the same thing with hypnosis
(the skill, not the psionic power, it's possible to hypnotise people into recalling something but not be aware they know it until called forth again)
so i think the magic isn't the stored memory itself,
just the ability to insert it and recall it without having to put the victim through an intense session of hypnosis.
the fact the mage isn't casting the spell to activate it again makes me think it's really being cast on the mage themselves to be able to draw the hidden memory out at will since there's no way to dispel it but you can stop it with a mind block.

*reviews BOM 113*
There's a savings throw if the recipient is unwilling.
Range is "one other by touch"
Memory fades after duration elapses
Mind Block makes it impossible to implant or retrieve

Sounds a lot like the recipient is the actual target here. If you were just enchanting yourself to be hypnotic then there wouldn't be a magic save and the info would not vanish once the spell duration did. You couldn't use stuff like Energize Spell to double it.

Also where's it say "no way to dispel it" ? I see no reason why a NEgate MAgic / Anti-Magic Cloud wouldn't work against it.

[Orin J.]

i'm not sold on the idea it's enchanting the person being used to store the memory.
you could do the same thing with hypnosis
(the skill, not the psionic power, it's possible to hypnotise people into recalling something but not be aware they know it until called forth again)
so i think the magic isn't the stored memory itself,
just the ability to insert it and recall it without having to put the victim through an intense session of hypnosis.
the fact the mage isn't casting the spell to activate it again makes me think it's really being cast on the mage themselves to be able to draw the hidden memory out at will since there's no way to dispel it but you can stop it with a mind block.

*reviews BOM 113*
There's a savings throw if the recipient is unwilling.
Range is "one other by touch"
Memory fades after duration elapses
Mind Block makes it impossible to implant or retrieve

Sounds a lot like the recipient is the actual target here. If you were just enchanting yourself to be hypnotic then there wouldn't be a magic save and the info would not vanish once the spell duration did. You couldn't use stuff like Energize Spell to double it.

Also where's it say "no way to dispel it" ? I see no reason why a NEgate MAgic / Anti-Magic Cloud wouldn't work against it.

so you're saying the implanted memory is an definitely an enchantment and not an actual memory? if that's the case why would a mind block stop the spell at all? shouldn't the enchantment simply kick in once the mind block is lowered?

[Axelmania]

so you're saying the implanted memory is an definitely an enchantment and not an actual memory?
if that's the case why would a mind block stop the spell at all?
shouldn't the enchantment simply kick in once the mind block is lowered?

Book of Magic describes Mind Blocks interfering with several spells:

92 : Alter Aura and Sense Evil
101 : Ley Line Transmission
104: Calling
113: Memory Bank
119: Second Sight
121: Hallucination (gives bonus)
211-212 : Spirit Fence

The spell magically stores a retrievable memory in a mind, which it can't do if the mind is blocked. Seems pretty straightforward.

Since you don't recast some other spell to retrieve the memory, the retrievability is an ongiong aspect of the spell's duration, along with the maintenance of the memory itself.

[Orin J.]

so you're saying the implanted memory is an definitely an enchantment and not an actual memory?
if that's the case why would a mind block stop the spell at all?
shouldn't the enchantment simply kick in once the mind block is lowered?

Book of Magic describes Mind Blocks interfering with several spells:

92 : Alter Aura and Sense Evil
101 : Ley Line Transmission
104: Calling
113: Memory Bank
119: Second Sight
121: Hallucination (gives bonus)
211-212 : Spirit Fence

The spell magically stores a retrievable memory in a mind, which it can't do if the mind is blocked. Seems pretty straightforward.

Since you don't recast some other spell to retrieve the memory, the retrievability is an ongiong aspect of the spell's duration, along with the maintenance of the memory itself.

is the retravibility on the memory or the caster though? other mages cannot retrieve the banked memory, just the caster. this implies the actual magic is in the person casting. the spell implants a retrivable memory in a mind, this can be done through faux psionics like other spells (like the ones that duplicate various psionics) do. it takes the magic the caster used to bring it out, which implies any enchantment is on the user as a sort of mystic security key.

you still haven't answered why the memory bank doesn't just take effect after the mind block ends if it's an enchantment, since it has a much longer duration. it makes much more sense if it's failing because the mind block is blocking the spell's initail attempt to implant a memory and giving the user the power to recall it..

[Axelmania]

is the retravibility on the memory or the caster though?
other mages cannot retrieve the banked memory,
just the caster.
this implies the actual magic is in the person casting.

Not really.

When a mage casts "Domination" on someone, other mages can't command them, just the caster.

This doesn't imply the mage enchanted themself to be dominating, just that the spell cast on a target only responds to them.

the spell implants a retrivable memory in a mind, this can be done through faux psionics like other spells (like the ones that duplicate various psionics) do. it takes the magic the caster used to bring it out, which implies any enchantment is on the user as a sort of mystic security key.

you still haven't answered why the memory bank doesn't just take effect after the mind block ends if it's an enchantment,

Yes I did: because it couldn't take hold in the mind. The mind is the only place the magically copied memory can survive.

[Orin J.]

you still haven't answered why the memory bank doesn't just take effect after the mind block ends if it's an enchantment,

Yes I did: because it couldn't take hold in the mind. The mind is the only place the magically copied memory can survive.

where does it say that? the description of the memory bank spell simply says "the mage can implant a block of information...without them ever knowing". it seems reasonable that if it's an enchantment on the person touched that the mind block will only stop it as long as it's maintained, since it only says the memory will fade away after the duration's time limit has elapsed.

[Axelmania]

it seems reasonable that if it's an enchantment on the person touched that the mind block will only stop it as long as it's maintained,
since it only says the memory will fade away after the duration's time limit has elapsed.

Mind block is described as doing 2 things:
1) stopping the implantation of memory
2) stopping the retrieval

I guess if you had no MB when a memory was put in, you could raise it without erasing the memory, so long as you lowered it when the memory needed to be retrieved.

So mind blocks interfere with the insert/withdraw but not the storage.

I don't think it's anything like if you had a block up then the spell would keep trying to insert the memory until the block went down. I think it's just one insertion attempt per casting.

There's no 2nd savings throw vs magic to have the memory retrieved, so that makes me think the spell just remains active (preparing to give the memory back) for the duration.

So if you wanted to 'negate magic' to stop the memory retrieval it would need to target the brain storing the memory, not the spellcaster.

[Orin J.]

. I think it's just one insertion attempt per casting.

so you agree with me the memory bank spell is giving the caster the ability to insert the memory and not enchanting the target with a memory then. glad we could come to an agreement.

[Axelmania]

it's just one insertion attempt per casting.

so you agree with me the memory bank spell is giving the caster the ability to insert the memory
and not enchanting the target with a memory then.
glad we could come to an agreement.

I'm not really understanding the distinction you're drawing here.

The spell involves several aspects (as many spells do):

1) inserting the memory
2) keeping it there
3) allowing it's retrieval

Despite "retrieve it at any time" the description "The information can be stored for three months per level of the enchanter." implies this means "any time during the enchantment".

Reviewing BOM 113 now the "standard if unwilling" savings throw makes it clear that the subject of the enchantment is the one whose mind has the memory stored within it.

I guess the only thing not entirely clear is WHEN to roll the savings throw. I would assume you definitely roll it at first (when the memory is stored) but it might be interesting to have a 2nd save when attempts are made to retrieve it. That's GM's decision I guess since it doesn't actually describe rolling more than once.

Memory Bank has the range of "touch" so usually when you're in range is when you do the savings throw.

I don't really follow what you mean about it needing to attack constantly until a mind block is down if it's an enchantment.

[Orin J.]

Despite "retrieve it at any time" the description "The information can be stored for three months per level of the enchanter." implies this means "any time during the enchantment".

if you enchant yourself you're still the enchanter for the purposes of the spell.

I don't really follow what you mean about it needing to attack constantly until a mind block is down if it's an enchantment.

if you're enchanting them to insert this information then the mind block does nothing to prevent the person from being enchanted, it only denies access to their mind. so the enchantment would continue regardless and the information would simply have to wait to finish implanting once the mind block drops. if the memory bank's magic is instead imposing the power to implant information rather than enchanting someone to carry it in their head, then the memory bank would fail entirely as they imply in the description.

[Axelmania]

if you enchant yourself you're still the enchanter for the purposes of the spell.

So why is the target the one who saves vs magic?

if you're enchanting them to insert this information then the mind block does nothing to prevent the person from being enchanted, it only denies access to their mind.

Access to the mind is required for the spell to work.

Sort of like you need "access to the skin" via "touch" spells.

so the enchantment would continue regardless and the information would simply have to wait to finish implanting once the mind block drops.

That sounds like if I intended for a fireball to hit someone and they were behind a wall, the fireball would keep firing until they got out from behind the wall. Still not sure where this idea comes from.

if the memory bank's magic is instead imposing the power to implant information rather than enchanting someone to carry it in their head, then the memory bank would fail entirely as they imply in the description.

If it's imposing the power to implant, then by your logic shouldn't I just have the ability to implant it for months, rather than just a single upportunity to plant it upon casting?

[Orin J.]

if you enchant yourself you're still the enchanter for the purposes of the spell.

So why is the target the one who saves vs magic?

for the same reason they need to save when affected by hypnosis, they're being subjected to the effects the enchanted person causes

if you're enchanting them to insert this information then the mind block does nothing to prevent the person from being enchanted, it only denies access to their mind.

Access to the mind is required for the spell to work.

Sort of like you need "access to the skin" via "touch" spells.

i don't understand your point, memory bank is a touch spell. are you saying you don't need to cast the spell when you implant the memory, you can just save it for when you need it instead?

so the enchantment would continue regardless and the information would simply have to wait to finish implanting once the mind block drops.

That sounds like if I intended for a fireball to hit someone and they were behind a wall, the fireball would keep firing until they got out from behind the wall. Still not sure where this idea comes from.

a fireball's duration is instant, memory bank lasts months.

if the memory bank's magic is instead imposing the power to implant information rather than enchanting someone to carry it in their head, then the memory bank would fail entirely as they imply in the description.

If it's imposing the power to implant, then by your logic shouldn't I just have the ability to implant it for months, rather than just a single upportunity to plant it upon casting?

is this why you brought up it being a touch spell?

[Axelmania]

if you enchant yourself you're still the enchanter for the purposes of the spell.

So why is the target the one who saves vs magic?

for the same reason they need to save when affected by hypnosis, they're being subjected to the effects the enchanted person causes

Which hypnosis spell are you referring to?

i don't understand your point, memory bank is a touch spell. are you saying you don't need to cast the spell when you implant the memory, you can just save it for when you need it instead?

No, I mean "must have an unblocked mind" seems like a range-ish requirement similar to "must have unblocked flesh"

a fireball's duration is instant, memory bank lasts months.

Spells like electric arc have a duration. Of course the arcs themselves are instant, it's just the ability to fire them which lasts.

Memory Bank doesn't enchant the caster to transmit their memories at will (like firing electric arcs, once per melee attack) because it sounds like they can only attempt it one time per casting.

The duration is if the casting succeeds (failed save) for magically keeping that memory in place.

That the memory vanishes once the duration expires seems to make it pretty clear it's the magic keeping the memory there. So if it were negated, the memory should be erased, unretrievable, as if the duration expired.

[Orin J.]

i don't understand your point, memory bank is a touch spell. are you saying you don't need to cast the spell when you implant the memory, you can just save it for when you need it instead?

No, I mean "must have an unblocked mind" seems like a range-ish requirement similar to "must have unblocked flesh"

that doesn't state any effect on the duration. it just says the spell is unable to insert or remove any infromation, not that the spell failed.

a fireball's duration is instant, memory bank lasts months.

Spells like electric arc have a duration. Of course the arcs themselves are instant, it's just the ability to fire them which lasts.

yes, that's what i'm saying implanting the memory is instant, it's just the ability to retrieve them that lasts.

Memory Bank doesn't enchant the caster to transmit their memories at will (like firing electric arcs, once per melee attack) because it sounds like they can only attempt it one time per casting.

you can't have overlapping instances of the same spell, so you would have to activate the enchantment before you could cast it again.

[Axelmania]

that doesn't state any effect on the duration. it just says the spell is unable to insert or remove any infromation, not that the spell failed.

There are cases where spells still partially succeed despite the target passing a savings throw (sometimes saves just reduce the effect) so I can see your point there may not be a hard line.

Usually in that case we're explicitly told of a partial effect (or renewed chances to use it) in case of the target passing their roll. When it doesn't do that (like here) don't we usually assume there's nothing?

yes, that's what i'm saying implanting the memory is instant, it's just the ability to retrieve them that lasts.

Okay, let's imagine:

1) you cast Memory Bank on a CS Grunt. You insert a memory "eating chocolate ice cream". Then you ignore the grunt for two years, the spell expires. You can no longer get the ice cream memory.
2) you cast Memory Bank on a Ley Line Walker, he passes his save, you can't insert anything.
3) CS grunt walks up 10 seconds later.
4) can you use the non-expired new spell to get the ice cream memory, since the duration isn't up?

If the one you are enchanting is yourself, then the LLW making his save vs magic shouldn't matter, you should have a months-long ability to recall any implanted memories, such as the old ice cream memory in the grunt.

My argument is: it's the spell itself which keeps the memory alive/present in the grunt. Once the original duration expires, I believe the ice cream memory is gone (can't be retrieved) so even if you cast Memory Bank on someone else (or on the CS grunt again) you can't get it back.

you can't have overlapping instances of the same spell, so you would have to activate the enchantment before you could cast it again

I guess this is where the interpretation does matter.

I see this like "charm". A mage can charm several targets. The spell is not overlapping because you're enchanting different targets, not yourself.

That's how I view memory bank too: I could implant chocolate ice cream memory in a grunt, cheese cake memory in a vagabond, etc.

But if your idea of this somehow being a self-enchantment is right, I couldn't do that?

BTW does anyone recall when the "no overlapping spells" idea was introduced? I don't think it was part of RMB but maybe came up in an FAQ or GMG somewhere? I think if someone wants 2 instances of Invulnerability for 120 MDC instead of 60 MDC (and get +20 vs magic) that's just fine (both can be taken down by a negate magic, after all, so it's not invincibility)

[Orin J.]

yes, that's what i'm saying implanting the memory is instant, it's just the ability to retrieve them that lasts.

Okay, let's imagine:

1) you cast Memory Bank on a CS Grunt. You insert a memory "eating chocolate ice cream". Then you ignore the grunt for two years, the spell expires. You can no longer get the ice cream memory.
2) you cast Memory Bank on a Ley Line Walker, he passes his save, you can't insert anything.
3) CS grunt walks up 10 seconds later.
4) can you use the non-expired new spell to get the ice cream memory, since the duration isn't up?

If the one you are enchanting is yourself, then the LLW making his save vs magic shouldn't matter, you should have a months-long ability to recall any implanted memories, such as the old ice cream memory in the grunt.

this isn't possible because the memory bank cannot be detected or accessed in any other way. casting the spell is implanting a new memory with a new casting, which isn't related to the previous casting. if that were possible you could use memory bank to access every instance cast by anyone for the duration. the casting explictly states it allows you to only retrieve the information to implanted when you cast it. once the spell fades you've lost whatever "key knowledge" you possessed as the caster to retrieve it and it fades away into the general trash information in the mind.

you can't have overlapping instances of the same spell, so you would have to activate the enchantment before you could cast it again

I guess this is where the interpretation does matter.

I see this like "charm". A mage can charm several targets. The spell is not overlapping because you're enchanting different targets, not yourself.

That's how I view memory bank too: I could implant chocolate ice cream memory in a grunt, cheese cake memory in a vagabond, etc.

But if your idea of this somehow being a self-enchantment is right, I couldn't do that?

BTW does anyone recall when the "no overlapping spells" idea was introduced? I don't think it was part of RMB but maybe came up in an FAQ or GMG somewhere? I think if someone wants 2 instances of Invulnerability for 120 MDC instead of 60 MDC (and get +20 vs magic) that's just fine (both can be taken down by a negate magic, after all, so it's not invincibility)

you can implant unlimited memories into any given person, so if you were right then memory bank isn't an enchantment to begin with but duplicating a psychic effect to implant a normal, fake memory to access later.

also the "no overlapping spells" thing was introduced for the exact reason you stated. 2 instances of Invulnerability isn't 120 MDC, it's 60 MDC + 60 MDC because of the rule that when your MDC runs out it absorbs the remaining damage instead of penetrating. if your 2 instances of Invulnerability is struck by a laser blast dealing 120 MDC you still have 60 MDC because the first layer absorbed the extra 60 damage from layering.

[Axelmania]

the memory bank cannot be detected or accessed in any other way.

Any source on that?

casting the spell is implanting a new memory with a new casting, which isn't related to the previous casting.
if that were possible you could use memory bank to access every instance cast by anyone for the duration.
the casting explictly states it allows you to only retrieve the information to implanted when you cast it.

Right: and the reason why is because it's magic keeping that memory alive. It's a magical memory, not an organic one.

once the spell fades you've lost whatever "key knowledge" you possessed as the caster to retrieve it and it fades away into the general trash information in the mind.

"fade away" never says "into the general trash", that seems speculative...

One thing you will note is two periods of time appear to be the same:

Duration: Three months per level of experience.
The infor­mation can be stored for three months per level of the enchanter.

Does it seem like a coincidence to you that the duration of the spell happens to coincide with the length of time that the information can be stored?

They're obviously tied together: the information lingers in the mind proportionate to the length of time in which it can be accessed.

IE it is the magic making the memory (the "block" to be literal to the spell's phrasing) stay there at all.

The 'fade away' is similar to (also BOM113) "the pigeon fades away". It's just a fluffy way of describing how spell effects end, not really meant to imply long lingering beyond a normal duration.

you can implant unlimited memories into any given person,
so if you were right then memory bank isn't an enchantment to begin with but duplicating a psychic effect to implant a normal, fake memory to access later.

I wouldn't call it a "normal fake memory" because it's "deep into another person's subconscious mind" and they're guaranteed not to EVER know what the memory is. That's not normal, because normal memories (even deep subconscious ones) don't come with guarantees of the person containing the memory never being able to learn them.

One possible way I thought of to get around any kind of "no casting the same spell on the same person twice" type rule (assuming it exists, sounds kinda familiar but can't recall if it's FAQ or book) is that even though the person saves vs magic, the actual magic effect is a different one...

Like maybe the "deep subconscious" might be creating magical constructs within their Dream Pools? *shrug*

2 instances of Invulnerability isn't 120 MDC, it's 60 MDC + 60 MDC because of the rule that when your MDC runs out it absorbs the remaining damage instead of penetrating.

The BOAP rule from 288/355, good point, long as the MDC aura counts as "armor" I agree.

For some reason (unrelated, topic derailment warning) I'm remembering that "AR from destroyed MDC armor" rule somewher but can't find it, anyone recall page?

[Orin J.]

the memory bank cannot be detected or accessed in any other way.

Any source on that?

nothing is listed as being able to detect a memory implanted by memory bank. or really at all. detecting artificially buried memories is something not done anywhere in the system.

Right: and the reason why is because it's magic keeping that memory alive. It's a magical memory, not an organic one.

any source on that?

once the spell fades you've lost whatever "key knowledge" you possessed as the caster to retrieve it and it fades away into the general trash information in the mind.

"fade away" never says "into the general trash", that seems speculative...

One thing you will note is two periods of time appear to be the same:

Duration: Three months per level of experience.
The infor­mation can be stored for three months per level of the enchanter.

Does it seem like a coincidence to you that the duration of the spell happens to coincide with the length of time that the information can be stored?

just seems like repetition to me.

you can implant unlimited memories into any given person,
so if you were right then memory bank isn't an enchantment to begin with but duplicating a psychic effect to implant a normal, fake memory to access later.

I wouldn't call it a "normal fake memory" because it's "deep into another person's subconscious mind" and they're guaranteed not to EVER know what the memory is. That's not normal, because normal memories (even deep subconscious ones) don't come with guarantees of the person containing the memory never being able to learn them.

i don't recall reading that anywhere. what are you referencing here? besides an implanted memory with no connection to anything would be pretty much unreachable without some special ability to track it. doesn't mean it has to be magical or anything.

One possible way I thought of to get around any kind of "no casting the same spell on the same person twice" type rule (assuming it exists, sounds kinda familiar but can't recall if it's FAQ or book) is that even though the person saves vs magic, the actual magic effect is a different one...

Like maybe the "deep subconscious" might be creating magical constructs within their Dream Pools? *shrug*

sounds more like homebrew to me than anything else.

[Axelmania]

nothing is listed as being able to detect a memory implanted by memory bank.
or really at all.

Nothing is listed as being able to detect a "Death Trance" spell or "See the Invisible" spell either, but I'm pretty sure their active effects (unexpired durations) would detect as active magic.

Right: and the reason why is because it's magic keeping that memory alive. It's a magical memory, not an organic one.

any source on that?

This is kinda of like asking for a source on "Lantern Light" being "magic light" instead of "normal light".

You pretty much assume all spell effects are magic effects unless explicitly told otherwise.

once the spell fades you've lost whatever "key knowledge" you possessed as the caster to retrieve it and it fades away into the general trash information in the mind.

"fade away" never says "into the general trash", that seems speculative...

just seems like repetition to me.

So we agree it's describing the same thing? Good.

[Orin J.]

Right: and the reason why is because it's magic keeping that memory alive. It's a magical memory, not an organic one.

any source on that?

This is kinda of like asking for a source on "Lantern Light" being "magic light" instead of "normal light".

You pretty much assume all spell effects are magic effects unless explicitly told otherwise.

actually the description of memory bank in the fantasy rulebook states that the information can be learned through "a psionic mind bond (telepathy doesn't dig deep enough)." which i just noticed. so it's pretty easy to presume from this it's a spell creating a psionic effect.

just seems like repetition to me.

So we agree it's describing the same thing? Good.

We do not.

[Axelmania]

just seems like repetition to me.

So we agree it's describing the same thing? Good.

We do not.

If the two passages I quoted about three-month increments are describing different things, then why would you summarize it as "repetition"?

It would not merely be repetition if it was describing different components of the spell.

actually the description of memory bank in the fantasy rulebook states that the information can be learned through "a psionic mind bond (telepathy doesn't dig deep enough)." which i just noticed. so it's pretty easy to presume from this it's a spell creating a psionic effect.

I wasn't aware PF had additional notes for the spell, I'll go check that tonight and probably scribble the note into my other main books' descriptions of MB. Interesting find!

Although it does seem kinda strange that Mind Bond would go beyond giving access to a target's thoughts, but even access to thoughts in their head they can' access themself.