Some Spell Questions (formerly: Lightning Shield... Block and Damage?)

[ashern]

Okay, I just want to throw this out here.


IT'S A GAME.  These rules are abstractions.  That's just how the system works.

When you put up a "block" with a fire shield, that doesn't mean that the creature strikes it instead of you, it could be that the creature starts to swing at you, then shies away because of the intense flame.  Regardless of how you do it, and how you flavor it, blocks don't do damage.  You can turn an extended one into an attack, but then it's an attack.  You can't make blocks do damage under the current system.

The closest you can get is wards, and those are simply two effects stuck together with the magic of thaumaturgy. 

[CMEast]

Indeed, unfortunately you can only do what type of action at a time with evocation, that's the power of ritual magic. The only exception is a grapple, being both an offensive block and a grapple.

Hmm... perhaps if you created a 'defensive grapple' using the same rules. An orbius style spell but rather than blocking an enemy for the duration, dealing one damage each exchange, you put the block on yourself and you deal one damage to anyone that tries to beat the block. It's not much but it's something. In fact, if this is workable (and I'm just throwing ideas around here, this certainly isn't in the book) then rather than deal 1 shift of damage to attackers, perhaps you could push them one zone away e.g. some kind of telekinetic barrier or air barrier; just like the grapple rules state (YS211).

Other than that, yeah the rules only allow one type of action at a time.

[Doc Nova]

"By the book" a defensive block action inflicting damage is comprised of two different actions and, therefore, out.  However, I've said it before and will say it again, FATE practically begs for house rules...heck aspects are, essentially, mini-house rules in what it might mean from one group to another.

That said, I've been wrestling with the idea of multi-purpose spells as I know my player base will come up with them.  Spells that entangle and damage are easy, they can follow the Orbius example via grapple and constriction.  However, spells that inflict aspects and damage in one, without requiring two separate spells or the spell to guarantee a consequence are not possible.  A "Cloudkill" style spell, where it could inflict an aspect like "Nauseated" while still inflicting a point or two of stress per round due to acidic vapors for the duration of the aspect (yes, I know that attack evocations do not, by the book, last longer than one exchange), or something similar as an example.

I mentioned this in another thread someplace, and I still think it would work...use the basis for the Spin rule, except open it to all actions (therefore, not just practitioners gain this benefit), but allow for attacks that strike with three shifts over their target's defense, or a maneuver that hits with three additional shifts, to enjoy a variant of Spin.  In these cases, it could be (for the attack) a fragile aspect, or for maneuvers a limited amount of damage (1 stress, to keep it in line with Spin's +/-1).  This would cover the notion of a "damage shield", where a defender's block (with Spin inflicted) could inflict a tad bit of damage, or a legsweep maneuver could do a small bit of physical trauma, and the like.  It could also be used to enable two aspects on a target, like a hefty frost spell that would normally inflict a "Frostbitten" aspect could opt for (with Spin) 1 point of physical stress, or possibly even a fragile "Numbed and Slowed" aspect.

[Leofwyn]

Okay, I just want to throw this out here.

IT'S A GAME.  These rules are abstractions.  That's just how the system works.

As incredibly useful as the above wasn't, I am looking for a way to make the rules make some sense.  I understand the heat on a fireshield fending off an attack - I could describe that, but an entropy sheild that looks like a shield of liquid - no one will know what it it until they hit it with something.  Person or thing throws punch hits shield of destruction and what do they pull back?  How does it not inflict some stress?  Does their sword, club, staff, etc. not take some damage and weaken?

I try and hit you with my wooden staff and you put up a fire sheild - logically the fire will burn something?  If not, we would not have all the discussion of collateral damage from attacks.

I am sorry if my question goes beyond the abstraction of the rules of the game - but it often happens in my games and I was looking for some guidence on a house rule.

BTW - the spin rules sound like a good begining Doc Nova. 

[luminos]

You have two options to do what you want from where I'm sitting, if you still want to play a game.  You either use the rules as written, and find a way to justify it in game for the way it works.  Or, you find out every single possible in game justification you will use, and make up a new rules set that is intended to model those in game justifications more perfectly than the current rules set does.  What you want doesn't happen the way you want it to with the rules for the game that we are talking about.  The problem isn't whether or not it makes sense, because its freaking magic.  Its fantasy, it doesn't make any sense except through the effort that we make to invent internal justifications for it. 

And what ashern said was important, even if he said it a little bit loudly.  These rules are abstractions.  No matter what system you deal with, you will have abstractions, and they honestly make it more fun.  Trying to go without abstractions in a game would require a ton of rolls just to see how far your character moves when he walks.  Just go with it and have fun and don't melt your brain thinking "Why does he not get melted by my entropy shield" or "Why does everyone get one and exactly one action per round even though in real life some people may attack more quickly than others in a fight".  You justify these things by the way you describe them as happening.  The entropy shield doesn't hurt them because they pull short of it at the last second to avoid burning death.  The more fit people get the same number of actions as an unfit person does, but you describe the result of a single dice roll as a flurry of punches for them and a single punch for the chubby guy, and it all works out.

[Leofwyn]

Wow, thanks.  In two seperate posts by differing people it is basically explained to me that I am an idiot.  Been playing rpg's almost 30 years but I need rules abstractions explained to me!  I am sorry for questioning any part of the game. Particularly one that supposedly encourages houserules as this one encourages. I thought this was a place to ask for help or to develop those rules. Looks like I was incredibly wrong!!

[luminos]

I am not calling you an idiot, and I apologize if it appeared that way.  I tried to address what looked like a disconnect, but I apparently missed what the problem was.  So, perhaps this is the correct angle.  The abilities of everyone needs to have some degree of balance, so that the actions of one powerful wizard does not trivialize the actions of his less arcane allies.  Wizards are already extraordinarily powerful in a fight, and if he gains the ability to deal damage as part of a free action (his defense against other attacks) he just gets too far out of hand.   Now given all of that, if I still wanted to do a damaging fire shield, here is how I'd go about it.  First off, the shield isn't so much a block as a stationary damage spell, so I won't model it as a block.  This means it won't really do much against ranged attacks.  In this way, I'd customize it as a delayed damage attack.  Its still a houserule, and it makes wizards even more powerful than they already were by adding another option to their combat abilities that no one else gets, and its not the nicest thing to house rule a boost to a powerful template without doing the same for the lower end templates like pure mortal and minor talent, but whatever, its your game, and your group gets to decide what works for them.  Here is a sample spell that would work like that

Fire Sheild
6 shifts of power
Control with Discipline + relevant bonuses
The first 3 melee attacks against the caster before his next turn require the attacker to beat the targeting roll for the spell or take a 2 stress hit.

Thats actually a pretty balanced spell overall, because you could do a lot more direct damage with a straight up attack. 

[wyvern]

So, if you want a damaging block, my suggestion would be to make it a combination block / maneuver - essentially reduce the strength of the block by three, and add an appropriate aspect to yourself - something like "on fire".  If someone attacks you with fists (or maybe even a dagger), you take your free tag to hit them with a two stress hit.
(No, this isn't by-the-book legal, and may need further limitations to be balanced.  Experimentation will probably be needed.)

Alternatively, instead of using ordinary evocation, find yourself an appropriate sponsored magic source.  Then you can do a plain old reflective ward as an evocation block, using the rules for sponsored magic allowing thaumaturgy with the speed and methods of evocation.

[luminos]

ooh, yes, sponsored wards would get the exact effect you are looking for.