Duration for Astral Sword psionic power?

[Donny Brook]

Originally Posted by Plane

Innate Attack (Melee) stuff AFAIK aren't always-on, they're weapons which you can manifest as a free action when you plan to use them.

'Manifesting' is not a concept that appears in rules. An Innate Attack is used by an Attack Manouever. An Innate Attack that is made a Melee Attack can parry. Parrying requires no maneouver.

The bells and whistles on this power don't change those fundamentals.

[Plane]

Originally Posted by Donny Brook

'Manifesting' is not a concept that appears in rules.

Perhaps some other term is appropriate. GURPS Powers does use "manifest" at least conceptually to talk about how powers manifest as advantages representing them.

I basically mean "a visual indicator of a weapon existing" which is described in other words. Pg 106 of powers even uses the term here: "Uncontrollable Trigger: Your ability manifests uncontrollably in the presence of an item"

Powers 112 also uses it for the Visible limitation as applied to normally invisible abilities:
"Your ability has a manifestation that makes it plainly obvious to everyone
nearby."

It seems an entirely appropriate term to use for normally-visible abilities, such as Innate Attacks.

Powers 55 also uses it under the "Touch" example of Innate Attack:
"Use this option for an angel who can summon a sword of flame (burning), a robot with a builtin force sword (cutting), or a kung fu master who attacks with a deadly touch (toxic)."

Obviously there are different kinds of Innate Attack (melee) though:

1) the kung fu master can make deadly touches but it's probably not visibly different from an unarmed attack (guessing no signature would tend to be applied building such abilities)

2) built-in force swords are clearly always visible weapons, unless it's a retractible force sword

3) the angel who summons a burning flame sword clearly isn't obligated to be carrying a flaming sword at all times - this would be an important thing in terms of whether the sword produces light, if it shows they are armed, if it registers as a power, if it is possible to try to disarm it or target it with a Beat using some special flame-affecting abilities, etc.

This is also an important consideration for "Jet" attacks which powers 103 says could represent "force blades, flame jets, plasma swords,"

There's a key conceptual difference between a plasma sword visible constantly through combat, and a flame jet which juts out every attack but isn't visibly present in between those attacks.

Whether the rules have actually been published in some obscure place to differentiate (mechanical precedent) the distinction is clearly intended so I'm throwing out some ideas for how you could represent that intention using existing mechanics.

I think the easiest way could just be to ignore Melee Attack as a limitation and just use Melee-Capable pricing (PU4p19) combined with a new "Cannot Ranged -40%" limitation.

The benefit there is now with Melee-ness as an enhancement it could be turned off via Selectivity and un-manifested.

Originally Posted by Donny Brook

An Innate Attack is used by an Attack Manouever.

B112 mentions "functions as a melee weapon" so it may boil down to how one interprets the verb "function".

They have reach for example - reach of a weapon is generally visible, meaning a melee attack has to be manifested in a visible way to be targeted in that way.

Does this mean melee attack IAs are by default always-manifested capacity (a sword for melee, a barrel for a gun, etc) unless otherwise indicated by something like no signature?

The effect of using the ability (the damage, the targeting roll) has the power active but it seems to indicate there's some passive indicator of having an ability to attack (or parry) in many cases.

Even with ranged ones I think that's the intent of "Guns as Innate Attacks" (Powers 54) and Built-In Firearms (Powers 136)

Even though always-on is only seen as a limitation for aura-based melee attacks, if a melee attack actually occupies a hand (a sword which appears in the hand, as opposed to... extending from the elbow?) then not being able to deactivate it would be a problem for manipulating objects.

This is also something chosen when designing innate attacks, as specified under the skill at page 201 where you 'must' specialize.

It does say beams/projectiles don't require the hand be empty (only unrestrained) so requiring an empty hand might be something along the lines of temporary disadvantage (one hand) albeit that's designed for switchable stuff so having it worked for transient ablities might require Alternate From designed to impart those attack abilities?

Originally Posted by Donny Brook

An Innate Attack that is made a Melee Attack can parry.

Barring either the Aura enhancement or the Cannot Parry limitation I agree.

Originally Posted by Donny Brook

Parrying requires no maneouver.
The bells and whistles on this power don't change those fundamentals.

if you can parry without a maneuver this only goes to show that innate attack has aspects of existence beyond the choice to use it with an attack maneuver - ongoing "parryability" so to speak could be seen as evidence it must be present at a specific reach.

This is important for cases where it takes time to switch the Reach of your weapon where that matters for things like close-range parries.

It's not an asterisk-reach (it doesn't require a ready to change) so it's more like a rapier (B273) than a flail (B274) but changing reach of a weapon is still a thing that happens, so it would probably have to fall under the 'free action' perview, which is normally limited to being done on your own turn.

IE if you have a 1,2 rapier, I think you could probably specify whether it's being held at reach 1 or reach 2 on your turn which would influence:

1) distance required to target the weapon with a beat

2) range at which you can sacrificial parry for an ally

3) which adjacent hex(es) your weapon is occupying if foes are evading it to get to you (or an ally)

4) penalties you face (-4 or -8) when using it to parry at close range.

I'd imagine similar guidelines would exist for wielding innate melee attacks too : whether the different range represents a long weapon being held with different grips, or a weapon which changes length, could just be a special effect, but end-of-turn fixed-reach seems like it would greatly matter for the above four reasons.