Noob Questions

[TheMouse]

You're reading it wrong.  Or perhaps they typed it wrong.  Try it this way:

"Each target that fails to defend, with Might, suffers a 2-shift hit plus any increase from the attack's margin of success."

I am not reading it incorrectly. You're quoting it incorrectly. The way I quoted it is the way it is in the book. The sentence as written in the book is a single clause, and it has a single piece of punctuation: A period at the end.

Adding those commas that aren't in the book doesn't swing it away from saying that you need to defend with Might. Nor would parentheses or dashes. So not only are you adding something that's not in the book, but the things you added don't do anything to make it say something other than what it said before. You've only changed the timing and a little about the emphasis.

[sinker]

Let me ask you something. Say I'm a new player (or just obstinate) and I don't take athletics. We are in physical combat. You (the GM) say "This guy is shooting at you, roll athletics to dodge." and I respond with "I don't have athletics, but I'm in the same zone as him. Can I use fists to knock the gun out of the way?" Do you say "Sucks to be you! Roll your mediocre athletics! MuaHahahaha!"?

Time and again Iago has told us to take what we have and extrapolate. Look at the loose definition the rules give us and make the best decision based on them. The rules for defense say that the defense should fit the attack, and yet all over the skills section we see examples of skills being bent to justify a defense (That example with fists is from the book, look at the fists skill). So do you want to believe a completely literal interpretation of a single passage (That could have easily been an oversight) or would you rather use the examples we have repeated throughout the book in more plain language.

[The Mighty Buzzard]

I wasn't quoting it incorrectly. I was positing that the writers are as human as you and me and will sometimes make mistakes.  Which is why I said "Or perhaps they typed it wrong,".  The "with Might" could have very well been just them reminding us that Might could be used in an uncharacteristic way to defend.  Which would have made the sentence mean "Each target that fails to defend suffers a 2-shift hit plus any increase from the attack's margin of success (like any other spell).  Oh, and Might is the default defense for this spell."

The problem here is, you're saying that it absolutely, for certain, 100% clarity, says one thing and I'm saying that it's not nearly certain enough to mean that they intended this spell to be defended differently than every other.  See Harry's explanation of the translation of the passage in Exodus in WN for an example of humans not always being perfectly clear when putting words to paper.

[The Mighty Buzzard]

Let me ask you something. Say I'm a new player (or just obstinate) and I don't take athletics. We are in physical combat. You (the GM) say "This guy is shooting at you, roll athletics to dodge." and I respond with "I don't have athletics, but I'm in the same zone as him. Can I use fists to knock the gun out of the way?" Do you say "Sucks to be you! Roll your mediocre athletics! MuaHahahaha!"?

Unless they have a stunt allowing for that?  Yes, they absolutely use their Mediocre Athletics.  Not doing so removes the entire purpose of being able to move a trapping from one skill to another and makes everyone who spent refresh to do so an idiot.

[sinker]

Sorry, decided to edit my post because I didn't think everyone would be on it so fast. Check out what I wrote, and the close combat defense trapping of fists on 231.

[The Mighty Buzzard]

Sorry, decided to edit my post because I didn't think everyone would be on it so fast. Check out what I wrote, and the close combat defense trapping of fists on 231.

Nah, I got what you meant before the edit.  And 231 deals entirely with thresholds, 131 is the trapping.  From opposite sides of a zone, no way.  If he'd been punching the guy beforehand and was definitely in smacking around range, sure.  Just keep in mind that unusual circumstances with a good argument allow exceptions, not alteration, of the rules.

[sinker]

Agreed, but my point is that the attack should define the defense, and that just because the skill doesn't have a defense trapping, doesn't mean that it can't be used if it fits the attack. Certainly there are stunts that move trappings around, but they still have a place when you're trying to use a skill that doesn't fit the attack (Burglary against a knife or fists against guns from several zones away for example).

Also thanks for the catch, my book-fu is lacking it seems.

[ARedthorn]

This is one thing I don't like about dresden... stunts not-withstanding, they seem to have pigeon-holed their defensive stats a little much. I'd like to see more than one skill come with a NATIVE defensive trapping.
Or perhaps, have a house-rule that lets players choose 2 defensive trappings- with the standard build being Athletics:Dodge plus either Weaponry:Parry, Fists:Block or Lore:Counterspelling at player's choice, +1 more per stunt.
Each would have to be at least a little limited in application based off context...

Athletics:Dodge (or Performance:Dance?) represent you being hard to hit, and work against pretty much anything as long as you're free to move around; Lore:Counterspelling would primarily be for defending against magic on the fly, but could also work against most mundane effects as long as you see them coming; Fists:Block and Weaponry:Parry mostly for anything close enough; Guns:Gun Fu might represent shooting things out of the air, or defensive cover fire; etc, etc. There's no reason you couldn't build a stunt to add defensive trapping to any skill you want, anyway... just instead of including one for free (on athletics), let them pick it.

Anyways- short answer... I'd be ok with letting fists act defensively without a stunt... but I'd prefer a house-rule like above.

[sinker]

Another question one might ask is what else would you use as a defense against the earth opening up beneath your feet and trying to smash you? You can't exactly use athletics as by the time you are aware of the attack you are in midair (the earth beneath your feet is gone).

The alternative I can see is having them defend at mediocre like anyone does when they are surprised or can't see the attack coming.

[Belial666]

And what system doesn't "pigeon-hole" their defensive stats?

In DnD, your defense against melee and ranged is your Armor Class, which is boosted by Dexterity. Unless you got a class ability saying otherwise, you can't use Wisdom to boost that defense, or Charisma or Strength.
In GURPS, your defense against melee is dodge and parry. Unless you have special abilities saying otherwise, you can't use your Will or Fortitude to block.
In Mutans and Masterminds, your ranged defense is dodge. You can't use Parry, Fortitude or Will to avoid such attacks.


So I don't see the problem here.

[The Mighty Buzzard]

Agreed, but my point is that the attack should define the defense, and that just because the skill doesn't have a defense trapping, doesn't mean that it can't be used if it fits the attack. Certainly there are stunts that move trappings around, but they still have a place when you're trying to use a skill that doesn't fit the attack (Burglary against a knife or fists against guns from several zones away for example).

I think this may be one of those intentionally vague areas that we're meant to interpret where the line is drawn table by table.  Sounds like I'm likely to be a bit less lenient than you but more lenient than rules lawyer types.

Also thanks for the catch, my book-fu is lacking it seems.

No worries, it happens.

[sinker]

From opposite sides of a zone, no way.

To be purely technical there are no opposite sides of a zone. If you and I are in the same zone then close combat is always ok, and if it's not ok then we aren't in the same zone.

[The Mighty Buzzard]

Another question one might ask is what else would you use as a defense against the earth opening up beneath your feet and trying to smash you? You can't exactly use athletics as by the time you are aware of the attack you are in midair (the earth beneath your feet is gone).

The alternative I can see is having them defend at mediocre like anyone does when they are surprised or can't see the attack coming.

Wear skis everywhere you go and hope they're facing the right direction to span the gap.  Wings might work but it's a power rather than a skill.  I'd even allow athletics if the target were on the move on the grounds that the caster might have simply poorly targeted it.

[sinker]

Wear skis everywhere you go and hope they're facing the right direction to span the gap. 

I like this plan, but then what skill do you roll for defense? Skiing? Resources? Scholarship (to represent having planned ahead)?

[The Mighty Buzzard]

I like this plan, but then what skill do you roll for defense? Skiing? Resources? Scholarship (to represent having planned ahead)?

Driving.  Skis are kind of a vehicle.