Block, Counterspell and the like

[Haru]

Yesterday we made our first characters and tested the waters, so to speak. There was something odd about the block/counterspell mechanics. I already looked in the forums and read the rules passages over and over, but it feels really odd.

To test the mechanics, we let the 2 sorcerers in the group fling around some spells at each other. The first sorcerer was specialised in spirit evocations and threw a spirit attack power 7 at the other and landet +4 on his roll, making it an attack of 17. We went through the options the other sorcerer (with an earth specialisation) had, none seemed to be satisfying:

- an earth block would only counter part of that spell, so a block 7 would still result in 10 stress
- a dodge against an attack roll of 10 was outright impossible due to a low athletics skill
- a counterspell seemed wrong, because the countering sorcerer did not know spirit evocations

On the other hand, if we would let him do a counterspell, he would only need to roll 7 on his disciplin roll, making it more effective to counterspell the evocation he doesn't even know, than to block it with the evocation he knows extremely well.

Another idea I had was this: if I put up a block in advance, because having a block is always a good idea in a situation like this, and when I am attacked, I put up a second block, in this case it would amount to two power 7 blocks, reducing the attack to only result in 3 stress. That would mean, everything comes down to the one thing most important for a wizard: preparation.

That and the realisation that evocations can hit you like a freight train, which probably should not come as a surprise...

[Tbora]

1) What refresh are you playing at?

2) And just how are you calculating the shifts in a spell, because unless your playing in a high teens refresh game there is no way your spells can be that powerful.

[Haru]

We created the characters at the submerged level, so 10 refresh.

I have never played fate before, so I admit, I might have done something wrong, but I did it exactly as the examples described it.

The first sorcerer was at 5 conviction and 5 discipline. His specialisation and foci made that into 7 and 6 for spirit attacks, so a 7 spirit attack would be at his conviction level, 6 control + 4 shifts from his roll would put his attack at 10 plus weapon:7 from the spell is 17.

[lankyogre]

One thing that is throwing it off is the +4 on the discipline roll. That will make an extremely nasty attack. A straight block from another spellcaster probably can't reach that unless you let them invoke or tag an aspect or two. In this specific example, the fates really aligned to boost the attacking player. A block and an enchanted item that had armor would probably be the best defense, though the wizard would still need to take a consequence or two depending on their physical stress track.

This does show why Harry doesn't is always hurt or injured and tries to find ways out of straight magical brawls with other casters.

[WillH]

The Discipline roll is what targets a spell.  To dodge or block a spell you only need to beat the discipline roll. Only shifts over the dodge roll or block value add to the stress done by the spell, not the total discipline roll.

[Wolfwood2]

The Discipline roll is what targets a spell.  To dodge or block a spell you only need to beat the discipline roll. Only shifts over the dodge roll or block value add to the stress done by the spell, not the total discipline roll.

Yeah, I think he knows that.  But with a 10 on the discipline, it's going to be tough to dodge or block.

[zcthu3]

And just how are you calculating the shifts in a spell, because unless your playing in a high teens refresh game there is no way your spells can be that powerful.

Actually Wizards can easily be that powerful. In our 10 (now 11) refresh game, the Wizard has Conviction 5, 4 Mental Stress and an additional mild consequence.

For 1 stress, the Wizard starts at a base power of 5. If he uses his 4th stress box this can be increased to a base power of 8. This is before he takes consequences. Taking a mild consequence in addition to taking the 4th stress box can increase this to a base of 10 (i.e. a 6 stress hit divided between consequence and stress).

All this before taking into account Focus and/or specialisation bonuses.

The problem is with controlling that much power. If the wizard does, however, get a high enough control roll this effect (remembering Focus an/or specialisation bonuses, aspects and fate points), then our wizard can throw a 10 shift effects with a mild consequence which, if an attack, could inflict up to 20 stress. The defensive block of +7 posited by the OP would reduce this to a 13 shift attack.

[Belial666]

A submerged wizard with 2 refinements that focuses on blasting can have;

Conviction and Discipline +5
+2 control, +1 power to chosen element
Foci giving +3 control and +3 power for offense



That easily allows him to do Weapon 9 attacks at +10. 

[MijRai]

A single wizard at -10 Refresh and 2 Refinement would be pretty powerful.

Skills
+5 Conviction
+5 Discipline
Specialization (Element, other Element, other element)
+1 Element Power, +1 Element Control,
Foci
+4 Offensive Element Control
+4 Offensive Element Power

Skills are simple.
Specialization, the Evocation's free one and half of one refinement.
For Foci, you get 4 focus item slots from having evocation and thaumaturgy. That is +2 for Control and Power. I add 3 from Refinement. Finally, you can have an extra Power or Control slot if the foci is tied to a single Rote.

So this guy can cast 10 shift offensive spells at +10, for a single mental stress. He also has 25 skill points left over, to use how he wishes. I wouldn't put all of my refinement into focus item slots, but that is because I am always worried about them being taken.

[luminos]

To the OP:  You didn't do anything wrong, there was no way the defender was going to get out of being hit by that spell.  A few things to note though.  He can't cast a block to defend against the attackafter the attack has been cast, same thing with a counterspell.  He can only take those actions on his turn, and the defense against an attack spell happens as a free action on the attackers turn.  So really, he is even more screwed than the example shows.  Also, blocks don't stack.  If the defender had two blocks against attacks up, he'd simply have to choose the largest one and ignore the other.

[Haru]

Ok, so evocations are intended to be that powerful, good.

To clarify the actions:
All he could have done was to try and dodge the spell (rolling athletics against the 10 shifts of the discipline roll), right?
If he set up a block beforehand, that would have helped, so obviously that should be the first thing anyone does.

Can I even counterspell an attack evocation? If for example I wait until the other sorcerer starts his evocation to disrupt it at the same time? Would be useful if in a conflict every group has a wizard, and all they do is cancel each other out. Or better yet: just waiting for the other one to act to cancel him out.
Or are counterspells only to destroy blocks and maneuvers?

[babel2uk]

Can I even counterspell an attack evocation? If for example I wait until the other sorcerer starts his evocation to disrupt it at the same time? Would be useful if in a conflict every group has a wizard, and all they do is cancel each other out. Or better yet: just waiting for the other one to act to cancel him out.
Or are counterspells only to destroy blocks and maneuvers?

Well, you can counterspell Thaumaturgy spells etc. But in my opinion, as far as evocation goes the effect has to be ongoing in your turn to act (rather than react) in order for you to counterspell. It might be possible (though I think it'd be houserule territory) to hold your action with the specific intent of counterspelling, but you'd probably be doing it blind (without the lore roll) and hoping you put enough power in to achieve. My own take on the way Counterspelling works is that the Lore roll not only represents determining the power required, but also the exact way to apply your will to the weak spots in the spell construct, so in my own game I wouldn't allow a counterspell as a defence (reaction) option.

[Njal]

Heh, this topic actually made me register.

IMO you have to allow reactive counterspells to be true to the books. You several different occasion in the books with reactive counterspells.

(click to show/hide)

Ivy counterspelling multiple Denarians you have LTW effectively doing something very similar to counterspells in his fight with Shagnasty

.

My house rules on the subject are that you are allowed to cast counterspells up to the limit of your Lore if you are aware of the attack (ie it's from a known attacker)  in a round with a penalty of -2 for every counterspell after the first.

If you don't have any skill in the particular element then there is another penalty of -2. You still get to make an assessment as to the power level of the attack with a penalty if you don't know the element. I'm still undecided as to how much stress you inflict with a counterspell but that's my hangup with the system.

[babel2uk]

(click to show/hide)

Ivy counterspelling multiple Denarians you have LTW effectively doing something very similar to counterspells in his fight with Shagnasty

.

Fair enough, but

(click to show/hide)

let's not forget that Ivy does things with magic that just shouldn't be possible (I seem to remember the multiple spells and counters being specifically mentioned in that context, but I may be misremembering), and LTW is a powerful member of the Senior Council - who all do things that a normal wizard would find pretty much impossible - I don't have access to the book, so can't check exactly what happens in Turncoat, but my memory of the battle between LTW and Shagnasty is mostly the shapeshifting competition - which obviously isn't counterspelling, so I assume you're talking about a different part of the confrontation.

My house rules on the subject are that you are allowed to cast counterspells up to the limit of your Lore if you are aware of the attack (ie it's from a known attacker)  in a round with a penalty of -2 for every counterspell after the first.

If you don't have any skill in the particular element then there is another penalty of -2. You still get to make an assessment as to the power level of the attack with a penalty if you don't know the element. I'm still undecided as to how much stress you inflict with a counterspell but that's my hangup with the system.

Not sure from the Counterspell description that you need to be able to manipulate the element in question. It's described as a matter of applying your will to the opponent's spell construct. I'd have thought if you're going to make being able to use the element in question important to the ability to counterspell, there should be some allowance or bonus for using the opposing element to neutralise the energy (using Water against a Fire spell, Earth against an Air spell etc).

Not sure what you're getting at on the stress thing. As far as I recall, the counterspell section doesn't mention stress at all - though I'm inclined to think that the person performing the counter should take stress for channelling the energy as per the normal casting rules. I don't think it inflicts stress on the caster of the original spell (over and above what they've taken in the initial casting). But the section on counterspell is a little hazy and might benefit from some more illustrative examples. Maybe one of the writers could oblige if they're following this discussion?

[wolff96]

IMO you have to allow reactive counterspells to be true to the books. You several different occasion in the books with reactive counterspells.

(click to show/hide)

Ivy counterspelling multiple Denarians you have LTW effectively doing something very similar to counterspells in his fight with Shagnasty

.

I would respectfully disagree with you on both examples.  I think these are classic blocks, with cool descriptions by the "GM".  None of the bad guys in question were doing well enough with their moves to punch through the blocks, but that's boring compared to a description of someone *actively* warding off attack.

(click to show/hide)

Heck, in the Shagnasty example, he is explicitly described as doing the shuffling steps of a sacred dance...  that's a dodge if I've ever heard of one, just described in a really cool way!  Then it's a straight shape-shifter battle after that...

After all, would Cowl *really* have let Harry toss a car on him if he could have simply disrupted the Evocation?  If there were counterspells available, wouldn't

(click to show/hide)

the duel between Harry and Arianna have gone a lot differently in Changes?