Zone wide evocation attacks to strong?

[Papa Gruff]

Hey there. We just finished a session were the wizard of my group wanted to do a zone wide attack on four mercenaries who wanted to lay destruction onto his homestead. He gathered eight shifts of power witch would have inflicted six stress (-2 shifts to make the attack a zone attack).

Now, the rules state clearly that everybody who is in the attacked zone suffer the stress of the attack if they are not able to counter it (YW 251). And thats where the debate started. I as the GM (who arguably isn't totally solid in all the rules during the third session) was of the opinion, that potentially 24 or more points of stress (four targets in the attacked zone) are very very much for an evocation with the power of eight. I still stand by this. In my opinion the effect is far to great for the coast and the risk invested, but the rules state clearly that everybody in the zone gets attacked.

Have I read something wrong? Do the spray attack rules apply in this case and the damage gets divided?? I'm confused and a bit angry about myself, because I ruled the enormous damage down at the gaming table and the following debate got rather heated (again sorry to my guys). How do you guys handle this?

Edit: Sorry if this has come up before. It's really late here and I just wanted to drop the question before going to bed. I haven't searched as much as I could have...

[luminos]

Its very powerful, but its by the rules.  The downside to zonewide attacks is that you also hit any allies that are in the zone, as well as yourself if you are there.  As a GM, don't ever let all the opponents make themselves easy targets for zone wide attacks.

[CableRouter]

Not only does it hit all four guys, it hits the zone itself with the same force.  Tossing around zone wide attacks in public areas usually results in calls to Homeland Security.  Even if no one saw it happen, it's going to look like a bomb went off and will be treated accordingly.  Look how much time Dresden wasted being grilled by the FBI and the agent was completely on his side because Murphy vouched for him.  Most players aren't going to be that lucky.

[Papa Gruff]

Yeah ... I get the rules an all (after consulting them after the session). Never the less, to me this is hugely out of proportion. In the end I have nothing against my player making a stand for himself and on his home turf. It never was the plan to burn his house down. Not by some nameless mercenaries anyways. To me it's just to much stress for (at least in some situations) essentially not a lot of cost. It also seems not very consistent with the spray attack rules were the damage gets divided (I can see the difference between those two, no worries).

The attack in question was a lightning attack witch was unleashed on some pure mortal guys who wouldn't have taken consequences. How do I do this? If this is that powerful, where is the drawback for the wizard? Should they be taken out "Dead" by such an obviously strong attack? I'm not really sure how to scale for such an event. It's not that difficult to make your allies get clear of a zone and then simply toast the hole damn thing with an +6 attack.  

[luminos]

If he fried a group of pure mortals with that, then I'd absolutely make taken outs die.  A six shift evocation attack is clear intent to kill, so lawbreaker would have been appropriate for deaths caused.

[Papa Gruff]

If he fried a group of pure mortals with that, then I'd absolutely make taken outs die.  A six shift evocation attack is clear intent to kill, so lawbreaker would have been appropriate for deaths caused.

Ok. That's a ruling I can life with and that I guess my players can get behind. As I understood it, the attacker determines what happens with the taken out. But I guess it is reasonable, that a weapon: 6 attack with some more shifts from not defending properly would kill a pure mortal and as the take out has to be within reason thats that.

Naturally my wizard wanted to avoid to kill these guys with the evocation. If we agree that this is not possible in this particular incident, then I have absolutely no problem with allowing this insane damage. I would like to hear more opinions on this matter from anyone who is interested...

Edit: I still think it's a lot of effect for very little effort. Still smells glitchy to me.

[CableRouter]

If he fried a group of pure mortals with that, then I'd absolutely make taken outs die.

You don't get to decide for your players what happens when they take someone out with an attack.

A six shift evocation attack is clear intent to kill, so lawbreaker would have been appropriate for deaths caused.

  Hardly a clear intent to kill on professional killers depending on the situation.  4 Mercs?  I'd have two of them start off by
moving into the zone and declaring a covering fire block on the Wizard to keep him from zapping them.  Going by averages
that's 5 points of defense (3 for skill plus dice, +2 for teamwork) right off the bat, +2 for Armor and even rolling the 8 he
needs to land that Weapon 6 hit and he's only looking at 7 stress.  At least one rank in Endurance for the Mercs, taking
the 3 stress on the track and they walk away with a Moderate Consequence, equal to a bad sunburn.  Does sunburn kill
people in your game?

[luminos]

You don't get to decide for your players what happens when they take someone out with an attack.

  Six shifts on a standard 2 point stress track mortal can be absorbed with a moderate consequence, equal to a bad sunburn and taking the remaining 2 point hit on the track.  Why does sunburn kill people in your game?

weapon: 6 effects kill people in my game.  Grenades are merely weapon 4, and you don't throw those without trying to kill someone.  Of course, if they were named NPC's they might take a bigger hit before going down, but that doesn't change the fact that you are trying to hit them with artillery level firepower.  The players have some control over taken out results, but it has to be within reason.  And within reason for this is deciding whether the guy's body twitches or smokes when it gets blasted with enough power to take him out in a single hit.  

This doesn't mean that you just hit a PC with lawbreaker out of nowhere.  But it does mean that, after being warned that the attack the wizard is preparing has a good chance of outright killing the opponent, the PC has to make a choice whether or not to risk it.  And if they risk it, it is absolutely appropriate to slap a lawbreaker stunt on them.

[TheMouse]

  Six shifts on a standard 2 point stress track mortal can be absorbed with a moderate consequence, equal to a bad sunburn and taking the remaining 2 point hit on the track.  Why does sunburn kill people in your game?

Six shifts of power makes for weapon:6. Attacks have a minimum of 1 shift to succeed. That's 7 points of stress. If someone has a 2 point physical stress track, that's 5 over their track. To avoid being taken out, they need to take a minor and moderate or a severe Consequence.

[CableRouter]

Six shifts of power makes for weapon:6. Attacks have a minimum of 1 shift to succeed.

Attacks have a minimum of 0 shifts to succeed.  It won't do any damage without a boost, but it still does connect. 

If someone has a 2 point physical stress track, that's 5 over their track. To avoid being taken out, they need to take a minor and moderate or a severe Consequence.

And being mercenaries, they probably have a rank in Endurance, that's 4 over the track and a bad sunburn might not stop a trained killer using heavy weaponry.   Should you be required to whittle them down over half a dozen rounds with 1 point attacks while they blow up your house and hose down the entire neighborhood with bullets?

[luminos]

Attacks have a minimum of 0 shifts to succeed.  It won't do any damage without a boost, but it still does connect. 

And being mercenaries, they probably have a rank in Endurance, that's 4 over the track and a bad sunburn might not stop a trained killer using heavy weaponry.   Should you be required to whittle them down over half a dozen rounds with 1 point attacks while they blow up your house and hose down the entire neighborhood with bullets?

Part of the point you are missing is that they aren't going to take anything more than a mild consequence, what with being unnamed enemies and all.  Therefore, the mechanical effect of giving them sunburns is bypassed by the narratively appropriate result of killing them, since they did just get hit by an artillery level blast of power.  You would never see Harry blasting a normal human, mercenary or not, with a full blast of his most powerful flame attack, because he knows full well that that is 1st law territory.  You should hold the PC's by the same standards, unless you are changing the setting.

[CableRouter]

weapon: 6 effects kill people in my game.  Grenades are merely weapon 4, and you don't throw those without trying to kill someone.

Going by that reasoning, EVERY weapon rating from 1 on up should kill people in your game.  You don't shoot people with pistols or stab them with knives without trying to kill someone.

Of course, if they were named NPC's they might take a bigger hit before going down, but that doesn't change the fact that you are trying to hit them with artillery level firepower.

The difference between a grenade and actual artillery is a couple of orders of magnitude.  "Artillery Level Firepower" is a meaningless term in this context unless you want to talk about a Wizard's Death Curse, which could pretty easily inflict a Weapon: 20 hit on 4+ zones at once.

The players have some control over taken out results, but it has to be within reason.

To use the exact quote, "it has to be within the realm of reason".  It's entirely within the realm of reason that a burst of electricity, a fireball or a grenade didn't kill the target but otherwise rendered him combat ineffective, it happens in the real world every single day.

And within reason for this is deciding whether the guy's body twitches or smokes when it gets blasted with enough power to take him out in a single hit.

So everyone ever knocked out by a grenade was killed by it?  I'll be sure to let one my buddy Jay know that he's dead now; he'll be rather shocked at the news.

Part of the point you are missing is that they aren't going to take anything more than a mild consequence, what with being unnamed enemies and all. Therefore, the mechanical effect of giving them sunburns is bypassed by the narratively appropriate result of killing them, since they did just get hit by an artillery level blast of power.

 

And just how do you figure this out?  Wait for them to take the consequence and blow up your house or kill a few dozen innocent bystanders in a hail of gunfire?

The point you're missing is that it is entirely within the realm of reason for one of these attacks to not actually kill the target.  Fortunately, it's the player who gets to decide if the target dies or not.

[luminos]

The comparison with grenades was to demonstrate that much power shows clear intent to kill, not to say that it always happens.  The nature of the adjective ladder is that +2 to an effect often represents an order of magnitude greater in effect.  That's why swords and grenades are separated by that amount.  The point is that weapon: 6 effects are dangerously strong, and any wizard capable of using such should be fully aware of the likely consequences of using them.  It strikes me as extremely unrealistic, and counter to the very nature of the setting, for a wizard to casually use those kinds of attacks on pure mortals, without some expectation of death.  I could easily see reason in letting a mortal or two survive such a hit if the rolled well enough on their athletics to represent the fact it grazed them, but in the give scenario, that would pretty much not happen.  At best, the player would expect them to have an athletics of three, so assuming he meets the control roll, at least one of the four guys he roasts is eating 12+ stress.  There is no way a player should be able to do that and escape the narrative consequences of breaking a law of magic.  In the extreme circumstance of the PC having evidence of his magic being self-defense, and justifying the killing on those grounds, you might get out of lawbreaker, but at the very least, mercenaries would be dead, and the wardens would want you that way.

[CableRouter]

The comparison with grenades was to demonstrate that much power shows clear intent to kill,

Dresden's Force Ring is a Weapon: 4 attack, exactly equal to using a hand grenade on someone.  He uses it on mortals all the time, to date none of them have been blown into little pieces by an "artillery level blast of power", to use your description of it.  Not some of the time, not occasionally, never, not even once.  

Does Dresden have a clear intent to kill when he uses a force ring on a mortal?  You say it's clear he does, I strongly disagree.

not to say that it always happens.

So it's within the realm of reason that the target survives.  That completely satisfies the requirement per the rules for taking out, that means that every single target over the entire course of the players wizard constitution extended life survives if he so desires it.  A Weapon: 4 evocation isn't equal to a grenade in any case, the difference is that the grenade isn't inflicting his will on reality.  If the will of the caster is that the target not die, he doesn't, as simple as that.

It strikes me as extremely unrealistic, and counter to the very nature of the setting, for a wizard to casually use those kinds of attacks on pure mortals, without some expectation of death.

 

The setting itself disagrees with your premise.

[KOFFEYKID]

And just how do you figure this out?  Wait for them to take the consequence and blow up your house or kill a few dozen innocent bystanders in a hail of gunfire?

The point you're missing is that it is entirely within the realm of reason for one of these attacks to not actually kill the target.  Fortunately, it's the player who gets to decide if the target dies or not.

Luminos is figuring that out by the rules, theres a section that talks about scaling, and how low level mooks will usually only have a minor consequence to spend. Let me find you some quotes.

In general, nameless NPCs should never accept consequences—when they take stress past their stress track, they’re taken out.

Supporting NPCs should not fight to the bitter, bitter end—the most determined of them should fight to a moderate consequence at most before you concede the conflict to the PCs.

-edit-

Also, I disagree with you, whats to stop my powerful wizard from casting say, and 8 shift evocation versus Sally who works behind the Burger King counter (Sally F'ed up my order, and put mayonnaise on my whopper)? Sally only has a stress track of two, and it hits, and she rolls a 0 on her defense. Sally gets hit for SIXTEEN shifts of damage. How in the hell are you going to say that she doesn't die? Its eight times her capacity to absorb damage.