That usually works. I use steel visualizations, or egg-shell visualizations to implant the "shelling" concept. Try some things, be creative, see what happens .

Constructs can be programmed to convert energy from other sources, but that becomes rather complicated. My advice would be to keep it as simple as possible: if you must make a construct that requires feeding, either feed it with bursts of psi from time to time, or program it to eat the ambiant psi-stuff that seems to float around places with lots of active people.

In theory, a permanent shield can be constructed, yes. Most obvious examples that come to mind are shields that leech off their wearer, and shields that depattern and absorb incoming signals. In practice, however, it is often desirable to take down one's shields from time to time, for general cleaning.

Yes, it is possible to affect your own emotions with a Shield set appropriately to the task. There is a risk of injury in any psionic activity; simply not enough known about the variables to evaluate the risk. In forcing one emotion all the time, you _might_ also risk psychological problems.

1 of 1 person found this question helpful

Some are programmed to "eat" ambiant psi-like stuff. Others are programmed to leach off of their creator. There are a few other ways to account for fueling the construct, in fact. Some of this sort suffer from program degradation over time, which can result in some unpredictable behaviours.

However, yes, you are right; the majority of constructs intended to be "permanent" pitter out of existence in a matter of days.

The simple answer would be to program it to stay around forever. Usually that's not a good idea though, I've heard of people having trouble getting rid of their buggy-constructs because they made it "permanent". Instead, I personally program it to "stay around until I send you this kill command". Just as good, but you have a backup plan in case you need to get rid of it.

2 of 2 people found this question helpful

Any attack can be blocked, and any shield can be broken .

Your best bet is to just make a bunch of shields, and layer them in an intelligent mannor. Also, have them alert you when you are being attacked, so you can repair them and react. If it's really a problem, combine sig-masking too. If they can't find you, they can't attack you. Annie also described a "Redirecting Shield" in her Shielding Seminar. The log for that should be up soon, so check that out as well.

Yes. Look up information on the Force Bubble:

art-force-bubbles.html
art-common-shields.html

At short range, tossing a construct can be done in much the same manner as tossing a softball. Hold it with your hand to guide it, and use the motion of your arm to give your subconscious the idea of "throwing". If you run into problems separating the construct from your own field, try using your free hand to pinch off the connection.

1 of 1 person found this question helpful

Shields serve a few purposes. One, to put a damper on some of your possibly over-active abilities. For example, I removed my shields while taking a test once to try to "feel" the correct answers from everyone in the class (i.e., cheat ). Unfortunately, the class had 300 students. They overloaded me in about 12 seconds.

Another is to filter information. For example, my shields are configured right now to amplify some peoples' pings/projections, and ignore other peoples'.

You've seem to focus on the combat related one. PsiPog doesn't teach combat, so it's hard for me to actually go into depth about this topic. Psychic combat is a reality though. Just for example, if a person can use telepathy to read your mind in a "guess the fruit" game, what is stopping them from being more aggressive and getting information that you don't want them to have? Shields!

Does that mean if you don't put up shields that you'll get attacked constantly? No... But if you make some enemies that are skilled in psionics, it's usually a good idea to have some stuff up just in case.

I hope that answers your question... this was a bit long winded .

7 of 7 people found this question helpful