"Shield" Concept - Retaliation

[Crion]

Hello everyone!

After watching the forums for the past year and finally convincing a group to try the game, I thought I'd come back in with a question and see what we can find.

One of my players is playing a Kinetomancer but wanted a different touch to a "shield": instead of reducing the damage he takes, he wants the "shield" to strike back with an equal amount of force to whatever hit him.

My thought was to do a standard Evocation roll using any bonuses for Defense (i.e. Spirit Defense Power bonuses) that must have the additional shifts to be "maintained." As long as someone strikes him within the duration, it strikes out at the target with a roll equal to whatever shifts of power he gathered.

For example: Let us imagine he succeeded at the spell to have seven (7) Shifts of power, five (5) of which are dedicated to making this a five (5) shift attack. An opponent lands a blow on the next exchange, and will now be "attacked" by this energy.

Does that make sense and seem balanced, or do you think there is a better way to do this?

Thanks for any and all thoughts and input!

--Crion

[devonapple]

A similar power was discussed in the Custom Powers thread over in the DFRPG Resource Collection - here is the link to the beginning of that conversation about Damage Shield: http://www.jimbutcheronline.com/bb/index.php/topic,19934.msg1072205.html#msg1072205

[Belial666]

A Ward (for thaumaturgy) or an enchanted item that contains a Ward can do it. Wards reflect attacks that fail to pierce them.

[My Dark Sunshine]

I'd go with Sponsored Magic (Warding) myself. A generous GM may allow such a power to bypass the restrictions to thresholds, that wards are commonly regarded as having, in a similar way to how Seelie Magic means you do not need advanced knowledge of human biology for Biomancy. At the least, it'd seem reasonable to lessen the restrictions.

I suggest this because Wards reflect energies back, as opposed to simply stopping them. This seems to be appropriate with what you're asking. Also, you'd not have to trade 'lessening the damage' for 'redirecting it'. Wards do both.

How you'd flavour it, is your choice. Perhaps an Old God sponsors the character, or perhaps it is simply a specialised form of magic; like Kem. Necromancy.

Although, there are other ways to go about it. Some nice options are explored in Devon's linked thread.

[Taran]

Why not take a stunt where if he is successfully attacked he gives up his next action and can do damage to his attacker.  focus the stunt on that particular spell, or even on defensive magic...something like that

[Belial666]

Because even if he has such a stunt he still has to pay for the magic with mental stress and use up his next action; resource-wise, nothing changes.

Stunts like that (Riposte and the like) are good when you quickly want to finish an opponent, not for defense. In fact, they are bad for defense; by using up your next action, you cannot move, even though normally you might be able to move with supplementals or speed powers. And mobility is paramount in most combats.

[Crion]

Because even if he has such a stunt he still has to pay for the magic with mental stress and use up his next action; resource-wise, nothing changes.

Stunts like that (Riposte and the like) are good when you quickly want to finish an opponent, not for defense. In fact, they are bad for defense; by using up your next action, you cannot move, even though normally you might be able to move with supplementals or speed powers. And mobility is paramount in most combats.

This is exactly why we aren't looking at is as a stunt. Using Riposte seemed like a good idea at first, but it just didn't seem to fit the bill for the element he was going for.

Essentially, the player mentioned the idea of having an aura around him that would deal damage to those that struck him, but it offered no defensive bonus. To me, it seemed that having this "aura" up with Kinetic energy seemed more fitting than a Ward, especially since the shifts of power that would normally be a block are now equivalent to an attack roll (i.e. in the example I posted, the attacker has to do a dodge against a Weapon: 0 attack worth five shifts).

Not certain if this concept for a spell is balanced, which is why I mentioned it.

I'll keep the Wards and Warded Items ideas in mind, because they are still rather intriguing, and may be VERY useful should I start using the general idea of Sponsored Magic: Runes for ward-like items. Otherwise, keep the ideas coming! Thanks again for the input!

--Crion

[sinker]

It's not really balanced as an evocation spell because of the stress economy. Consider with this spell he would use 1 mental stress in the casting, however he could potentially attack many targets with the returned damage. Most casters are capable of making four attacks per combat without using any extra resources (consequences, etc) a caster with this spell would be capable of making four attacks per opponent per combat.

[devonapple]

I feel that this (and abilities like it) can be a compelling challenge for PCs to overcome when it is given to an opponent.

Making it into a spell starts to get really complicated.

That said, here is a thought:

A 2-shift premium is usually enough to make an effect Zonewide, automatically targeting everyone in a Zone.

This retaliation shield is, itself, like a Zonewide attack.

If folks agree, we take Zonewide attack, replace the auto-target component with an auto-target-opponents-who-hit-me. We could consider it to be a net-zero change, because the added bonus of being unlikely to hit allies in your Zone would be balanced by the limitation of which opponents do get targeted.

All we need to do then is assign a shift value to this acting like a block and taking effect outside of the caster's normal turn.

[Crion]

It's not really balanced as an evocation spell because of the stress economy. Consider with this spell he would use 1 mental stress in the casting, however he could potentially attack many targets with the returned damage. Most casters are capable of making four attacks per combat without using any extra resources (consequences, etc) a caster with this spell would be capable of making four attacks per opponent per combat.

I had completely overlooked that side of things. I guess since I'm still in the "the system doesn't say 'no'" mentality, I forgot to take that into consideration. I still think the idea is pretty good, but I can see why it would be over the top.

I feel that this (and abilities like it) can be a compelling challenge for PCs to overcome when it is given to an opponent.

Making it into a spell starts to get really complicated.

That said, here is a thought:

A 2-shift premium is usually enough to make an effect Zonewide, automatically targeting everyone in a Zone.

This retaliation shield is, itself, like a Zonewide attack.

If folks agree, we take Zonewide attack, replace the auto-target component with an auto-target-opponents-who-hit-me. We could consider it to be a net-zero change, because the added bonus of being unlikely to hit allies in your Zone would be balanced by the limitation of which opponents do get targeted.

All we need to do then is assign a shift value to this acting like a block and taking effect outside of the caster's normal turn.

The 2-shift premium does make it a bit more challenging of a spell to cast. Now, I have to ask: would leaving it as a Weapon:0 attack with the shifts of power acting as the attack roll (and therefore, the potential damage) be enough, or do you think there should be at least one more shift of power needed to "arm" it?

I don't like saying "no" to a concept, so I'm just trying to see if it is something that is doable, or if it is just horribly off the scale.

Thanks again, everyone!

--Crion

[devonapple]

The 2-shift premium does make it a bit more challenging of a spell to cast. Now, I have to ask: would leaving it as a Weapon:0 attack with the shifts of power acting as the attack roll (and therefore, the potential damage) be enough, or do you think there should be at least one more shift of power needed to "arm" it?

That is just a starting point. There needs to be a lot more to this spell than just 2 shifts.

[InFerrumVeritas]

Here's how I'd allocate strength:

For a once per exchange retaliation, I'd go with n shifts for block strength.  Then, 2 shifts for the retaliation (attack using opponent's roll+weapon rating vs. opponent's defense).  If the block is beaten, no retaliation.

For a retaliation against multiple opponents, the same as above but caster may reduce n by 1 for each additional target.

[sinker]

Actually I've been thinking about this now and I think that all I would do is make it an attack with 2 shifts for applying it to multiple targets. He's giving up the ability to hit all of the targets in the zone for the ability to not hit allies like Devonapple said and he's not trying to prevent an attack or reduce damage at all, so a block isn't really appropriate, just have him set the power of the attack and add 2 shifts to apply it zone wide. Then have him roll discipline to hit and all attackers have to defend against the spell (the original discipline roll vs whatever they use to defend plus the shifts as a weapon value) when they attack.

[evileeyore]

Actually I've been thinking about this now and I think that all I would do is make it an attack with 2 shifts for applying it to multiple targets. He's giving up the ability to hit all of the targets in the zone for the ability to not hit allies like Devonapple said and he's not trying to prevent an attack or reduce damage at all, so a block isn't really appropriate, just have him set the power of the attack and add 2 shifts to apply it zone wide. Then have him roll discipline to hit and all attackers have to defend against the spell (the original discipline roll vs whatever they use to defend plus the shifts as a weapon value) when they attack.

Sounds... reasonable.


But what about the time factor?  If it is supposed to last more than 1 round... it should have shifts reflecting it's extended nature.