I like Mind Control, it is a fun thing and a mighty tool to use in the story. Unfortunately, most I see is people directly wishing what they want to get. Example: [Son to Mom "Mom, you are a nudist with a strongest desire to go around naked."] Straight change of mind, no conflict, no fun. My suggestion: [Son to Mom "Mom, you are strongly compelled to go around naked"] The difference? She gets pushed to it, but not go along with it, allowing her have all range of emotions of what she does. It can be deepened, with more flavor. ["you believe you are blackmailed to do so", or "you read some psychology mumbo-jumbo that it will help me grow a man.] One for a negative, one for positive. The final result is achieved, some emotional flavor added to the story. What do you think?
A minor idea on implementing Mind Control in stories
- Thread starter Nuff_Said
- Start date
JaxRhapsody
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Sep 14, 2011
- Posts
- 2,195
So instead of straight up do as I say, it's just suggestive until it's a compulsion? In a way it's more believeable, I guess would be the way to put it- perhaps he's using subliminal messages that influence her subconscious. I think I used something like that in One Loving Mother.
LupusDei
curious alien
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2017
- Posts
- 4,262
In my opinion all magic benefits from being more subtle, and not breaking laws of physics or psychology directly, but only enabling incredibly improbable events or desires to happen or manifest and lead to desired outcomes indirectly.
In ideal game of mind control there should always be a valid interpretation available where the "controller" is the fool being played. Or at least, that he only is having that power in his own imagination, while people actually act on their own free will, perhaps enabled by the joke.
However, I suspect great deal of mind control authors and possibly readers alike don't have patience nor imagination to follow a more subtle approach, and/or may see the direct reality editing as the desired effect.
In ideal game of mind control there should always be a valid interpretation available where the "controller" is the fool being played. Or at least, that he only is having that power in his own imagination, while people actually act on their own free will, perhaps enabled by the joke.
However, I suspect great deal of mind control authors and possibly readers alike don't have patience nor imagination to follow a more subtle approach, and/or may see the direct reality editing as the desired effect.
JaxRhapsody
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Sep 14, 2011
- Posts
- 2,195
That's about how magick works. If the one doing, or trying to do the mind control, and his subject is aware, and playing along- not really mind control. There's always a place for that, but it doesn't do the thing, when somebody wants actual mind-control.
LupusDei
curious alien
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2017
- Posts
- 4,262
Magic I practice only works by making the subject aware that the magic has been done.
JaxRhapsody
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Sep 14, 2011
- Posts
- 2,195
I haven't done much in quite a while, other than consecrating my friends, boyfriends house last year, and was lucky not a single cat got out.
alohadave
Doing better
- Joined
- Dec 6, 2019
- Posts
- 3,375
In general, unless you want the main character to have absolute power, you need to build in limits and rules to the power. The character doesn't necessarily need to know them at first, but they should be there, and they should be able to discover them.
If you are just doing a wish fulfillment stroker, have the character be a god with absolute power.
If you are just doing a wish fulfillment stroker, have the character be a god with absolute power.
FantasySharer1
Really Experienced
- Joined
- Feb 13, 2015
- Posts
- 1,327
A good way to do this might be to simply use the "Inception" idea. The main character can plant an idea into anyone's head that they will think about, and can shape the idea and and mode of the idea. Perhaps at the maximum limit, can also note whether the target feels good or bad about it. Nothing else.
Son: "You are thinking about your son's cock, my cock, and wondering how big it must be since I've grown into a handsome, strong, tall man now. You wonder if it is bigger than Dad's. How thick it has to be if I'm his son and yours, and how it probably fits perfectly into your pussy. You'll think about this actively for a few minutes, and then fantasize about it the rest of the day in the back of your mind."
He has no power to make her do anything. He cannot command her actions. But he can influence what she thinks about. He cannot debilitate her "you are unable to even look at or think of anything else". It's a subtle inception power.
Over time, he has his mother fantasizing daily and then he starts doing outward activities that are getting her closer and closer to temptation.
Son: "You are thinking about your son's cock, my cock, and wondering how big it must be since I've grown into a handsome, strong, tall man now. You wonder if it is bigger than Dad's. How thick it has to be if I'm his son and yours, and how it probably fits perfectly into your pussy. You'll think about this actively for a few minutes, and then fantasize about it the rest of the day in the back of your mind."
He has no power to make her do anything. He cannot command her actions. But he can influence what she thinks about. He cannot debilitate her "you are unable to even look at or think of anything else". It's a subtle inception power.
Over time, he has his mother fantasizing daily and then he starts doing outward activities that are getting her closer and closer to temptation.
LupusDei
curious alien
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2017
- Posts
- 4,262
One seemingly subtle but potentially extremely powerful way of mind control that I haven't seen explored at all is ability to alter memories (although, admittedly there's site rules that may prohibit some, possibly very desirable uses of such, but it may still work).
Human memory is malleable, and remarkably unreliable. We do reconstruction of the past scenes from base elements every time we recall them, in a way that makes most sense at the moment of recall. And what elements are prioritized may depend upon conversation goals. Then we store the results, and next time we may recall this story about our memories and not the memories. If there's been intentionally edited elements (exclusions or added bragging to appease or to impress the conversation partner) there now could be two versions.
The more recent, even knowing it's not all true, may take precedence, especially if repeated. Newfound facts about persons participating in the events may color the memories, new attitudes can do the same. Claims someone later found as having foul intentions did harm long before that are natural, even if without factual basis, for example.
Wholesale false memories are possible. Not only after a while someone may claim they have done something they merely wanted to do, just as easily as claiming that they never did something well documented as factual, dreams can get mixed with reality. It gets even worse when we talk not facts but subtle things like attitudes, past political views and the like. It's not lying, in a sense the person sincerely believes the interpretation they present.
A hypothetical extremely persuasive person could have ability to influence the process, or even plant memories during a conversation. It has to be done indirectly, with steering questions and implied claims rather than direct suggestions or contradictory claims, although one could also start with an alternative fact and then try to prove it true, but that's more confrontational and brings natural resistance. One could start with wondering why the other's (actually long held) attitudes have become so strange lately.
Human memory is malleable, and remarkably unreliable. We do reconstruction of the past scenes from base elements every time we recall them, in a way that makes most sense at the moment of recall. And what elements are prioritized may depend upon conversation goals. Then we store the results, and next time we may recall this story about our memories and not the memories. If there's been intentionally edited elements (exclusions or added bragging to appease or to impress the conversation partner) there now could be two versions.
The more recent, even knowing it's not all true, may take precedence, especially if repeated. Newfound facts about persons participating in the events may color the memories, new attitudes can do the same. Claims someone later found as having foul intentions did harm long before that are natural, even if without factual basis, for example.
Wholesale false memories are possible. Not only after a while someone may claim they have done something they merely wanted to do, just as easily as claiming that they never did something well documented as factual, dreams can get mixed with reality. It gets even worse when we talk not facts but subtle things like attitudes, past political views and the like. It's not lying, in a sense the person sincerely believes the interpretation they present.
A hypothetical extremely persuasive person could have ability to influence the process, or even plant memories during a conversation. It has to be done indirectly, with steering questions and implied claims rather than direct suggestions or contradictory claims, although one could also start with an alternative fact and then try to prove it true, but that's more confrontational and brings natural resistance. One could start with wondering why the other's (actually long held) attitudes have become so strange lately.
