Some different ways to use the same skills for the same purpose

[Baron Hazard]

Just wanted to get a ruling on if both of these actions are equally valid in everyone elses opinion.

This is 2 different ways to find one's opponent out of ammo.

Situation 1 Maneuver

Vladimir and Hendricks are exchanging gunfire. Vladimir rolls a Guns Maneuver to determine that Hendricks has just used his last bullet (He’d been counting) placing the Aspect Empty Clip on Hendrickson. Hendricks uses his own Guns skill to defend (He knows his own gun better than Vlad does.)

Vladimir rolls [+ + - _] Net +1 increases his Superb gun skill to Fantastic (+6), Hendricks rolls [+ - - _] a net of -1 decreases his gun skill from Great to Good, Vladimir applies Empty Clip to Hendricks with 3 shifts to spare making it sticky. Hendricks growls as his gun clicks instead of barks and presses his back against the Nearby Column he’d earlier declared. He rolls a Guns Maneuver to reload (Removing the Empty Clip Aspect) the GM decides that Vlad can’t really contest the reload so it is an average difficulty. Vlad’s player disagrees and after some negotiation on action the GM agrees that Vladimir can try and Intimidate Hendricks into not reloading.

Hendricks’ Guns (+4) Maneuver to reload [+ - _ _]    Net Total: +4
Vladimir’s Intimidation (+3) Block to contest the reload [+ - - _] Net Total: +2

Vlad’s player wants to keep Hendrick’s weaponless, so he spends 1 FP to Invoke his aspect “I Must Be Feared and Respected” bringing his Intimidation roll to a Net Total: +4.

The GM decides that Hendrick’s will similar spend 1 FP to invoke his Unflappable aspect, his net total raises to +6.

Hendricks successfully removes the Empty Clip aspect. He reloads and steps out to renew his attack.

Situation 2 Defense

Hendricks steps out to open fire on Vladimir, Vladimir decides against ducking back behind the cover of his Nearby Column, instead trusting that he successfully counted Hendricks’ bullets. It’s an attempted Defense using his Gun Skills. Hendricks’ Guns (+4) [- - - +] total (+2). Vlad’s Guns (+5) [- - + +] total (+5).  Vlad smirks as Hendricks’ gun clicks instead of barks and raises his own weapon.

[Kordeth]

Situation 1 seems valid, but I wouldn't allow situation 2. Declaring your opponent to be out of ammo is a maneuver or a declaration, not a defense. You could maybe buy "bullet counter" as a stunt, though.

[Deadmanwalking]

Situation 1 can make an empty clip meaningful. An empty clip could be used for narrative color in Situation 2, but will have no mechanical effect of any sort (Hendricks is assumed to reload, and may attack the next turn as normal).

[Kordeth]

Situation 1 can make an empty clip meaningful. An empty clip could be used for narrative color in Situation 2, but will have no mechanical effect of any sort (Hendricks is assumed to reload, and may attack the next turn as normal).

My issue with situation 2 is he's using Guns for defense, which generally falls under the purview of a stunt.

[Baron Hazard]

Yah, Deadmanwalking thats true, I was just wondering if either seemed incorrect. I understand the difference between scenario 1 requiring Hendricks to spend an action to reload (i.e. remove the tag), while number 2 is only an instant.

Another question was rather the Gun-Knowledge trapping is kosher here, or if i should require an alertness for "bullet-counting"

Edit: Kordeth, I know it seems like a purely flavor-based situation, but i have to disagree. Using Guns as a DODGE is a stunt. The difference being here is that I simply wouldn't allow my player to use this more than once per conflict (barring perhaps an incredibly long stint of gun fire) the gun running out of ammo each round without him firing off a single bullet just wouldn't work.

[CMEast]

I think you could use either guns or alertness for it, however I would say that as neither is normally used for defense you'd have to provide a reason why you could. A stunt would obviously work but is a little excessive, a 'bullet counting' aspect of some sort with a spent fate point would work fine too, as would a manoeuvre declaring your knowledge of the opponents gun or 'battle awareness' (tagged for free to declare you can use guns/awareness to block). Perhaps an assessment check in a previous exchange as a supplemental action would be fine too.

Any of these would provide a reason why you could use a non-defensive skill as a defense.

Another way of seeing it is as a block which certainly is doable with the guns skill. If he beats your block then he just fired a few less bullets than normal due to a low clip. Of course that's a pro-active approach rather than a defensive approach, to do this reactively would again require a stunt or some relevant aspect in my opinion.