Noob Questions

[computerking]

Yeah, I'm going to ask a few questions that will make me look like a noob. Because I am one. Here goes a few things I'm scratching my head about...
Can a rote be established for Spell Prolongation (For any spell)?

Does a person in a full magical block (against all actions) still get rolls to avoid incoming attacks?

Do Zone maneuver aspects based on basic conditions (example, “slick footing” from a Water evocation) stay Sticky based on success on the roll, or based on magical Duration?

Thanks in advance...
And feel free to put your own noob questions in here, too, if only to make me feel better .

[Sanctaphrax]

1. I think so. You might need to specify the sort of spell that you are prolonging though.

2. Yes. Also, blocking all actions is kinda weird. What sort of block did you have in mind?

3. Stickyness and duration are not connected. An aspect can be sticky and yet disappear when the duration expires.

The above is from memory, so I suggest you get a second opinion before drawing conclusions.

[gojj]

I'd like to tack on a question I've been wondering, but have been hesitant to make a thread asking it: What does RAW stand for? I know it relates to the rules, but that's about it. Rules and Ways? Really Angry Wizard?

[Silverblaze]

1. Yes, but I think you can prolong it without saying it is allowed to be prolonged.  Rotes can basically be almost anything.

2. You always get to roll defense, just often at mediocre (+0) Unless you are defending with Endurance..I don't see how most blocks could stop that.

3. Duration could only effect the situation in rare circumstances.  Say if hte ice suddenly sublimates (by design of the spell) at the duration or some such thing.

Sadly none of this is going to be true 100% of hte time FATE is about variability and options not constants.

@ Gojj:

Rules
As
Written

[gojj]

Thank you.

[TheMouse]

>>>Can a rote be established for Spell Prolongation (For any spell)?

It isn't explicit, but I'd say yes. You'd just have to be as specific as any other rote.

>>>Does a person in a full magical block (against all actions) still get rolls to avoid incoming attacks?

Whenever someone Blocks you, you get to roll whatever you want. You just have to overcome the Block for it to do anything.

So if someone hit you with a Block with a strength of +4. This Block covers defending. The victim of the block gets attacked and wants to resist, so they roll Athletics to dodge, producing a +3 Effort. They've failed to overcome the Block, so their defense does nothing.

Next exchange, they get attacked again and try to dodge again. They get a +5, beating the Block. Now they apply their dodge against the attack.

>>>Do Zone maneuver aspects based on basic conditions (example, “slick footing” from a Water evocation) stay Sticky based on success on the roll, or based on magical Duration?

You must spend shifts to add to the duration of any Aspects created with magical Maneuvers. This is covered on page 252-253.

[sinker]

Can a rote be established for Spell Prolongation (For any spell)?

We had a thread about that a while back if you want to go digging. I don't think we resolved much though. I think the general attitude is that you can make a rote to extend the duration of another spell, however people are split on whether not not it needs to be for one specific spell only or if it's ok for any spell. My initial inclination is to say "why would you want to waste a rote like that?" but after that I would think it would be ok for it to be universally used for any spell.

Does a person in a full magical block (against all actions) still get rolls to avoid incoming attacks?

I'd say yes, but only because we have precedent for a magic grapple, which has that effect. So if you want a block that prevents them from making defensive rolls then pay the fate point and go through the process to make a grapple just like everyone else does.

Do Zone maneuver aspects based on basic conditions (example, “slick footing” from a Water evocation) stay Sticky based on success on the roll, or based on magical Duration?

That's a tough one. My inclination is usually to simply say that it's based on the roll and is either sticky or fragile. There's a part of me that would rather look at each individual aspect and see if it must be maintained (like "hurricane winds") or if it would naturally hang around (like "wet floors") but I think that kinda encourages people to use the aspect that works best mechanically, rather than the aspect that best fits the story and I'd rather have a better story.

TheMouse is technically right though, RAW says that you pay duration for all maneuvers.

[Sanctaphrax]

Wait, precedent for a grapple blocking defense rolls?

I was under the impression that defense rolls could not be blocked. I'd like to see this precedent if possible.

[Silverblaze]

Wait, precedent for a grapple blocking defense rolls?

I was under the impression that defense rolls could not be blocked. I'd like to see this precedent if possible.

Agreed.  I thought you always got a roll at mediocre.

[sinker]

Wow, apparently I did not remember my grappling rules correctly. I was saying that there was precedent for a magic grapple (Madge's Orbius spell) but I was completely wrong about grapples blocking defense rolls. Just wasn't remembering that right.

I would still have the block not apply to defense rolls, but for a different reason now that I'm looking at those portions of the book. A block applies to "actions," and a defense roll is not technically an action but a part of someone else's attack (I know it's weird but I went looking for defense rolls and only found them under attacks).

[zenten]

Page 210 Your Story: "You can't use a block to prevent someone from making a defense roll."

[ways and means]

I worked under the assumption that a defense roll couldn't be blocked defensive skill could be blocked (a grapple should nullify any athletics or weapons modifier unless the skill roll beats the grapple) this is how I see ambushes too some degree as a block. 

[Belial666]

Page 210 Your Story: "You can't use a block to prevent someone from making a defense roll."

Addendum: unless you're imaginative or clever enough


For example, an offensive block against perception (effectively a blindness/deafness spell or similar) doesn't prevent anyone from doing defense rolls. But because they will fail to notice any incoming attacks, they will be surprised, rolling defense at mediocre even though the block doesn't directly prevent them from actually rolling defenses. Ditto if you make the attacker invisible instead of the defender blind, only in reverse.

There are other ways to similarly have someone not roll a defense without actually making them incapable of defense rolls.

[computerking]

Good answers all, thanks for the foof for thought.

Moving on to another couple of  questions.
Regarding Morgan's Earth Stomp spell on YS293:
Would a (single target) spell similar to Harry's Gravitus (in Changes and It's My Birthday, Too) also be resisted with Might, instead of Athletics?

Also, how would a Zone-Wide attack be defended against, narratively? I mean, if for example Harry did a Zone-Wide Fuego, how could someone justify avoiding being hit by it, other than someone who would be able to dive out of the zone?

[ARedthorn]

Good answers all, thanks for the foof for thought.

Moving on to another couple of  questions.
Regarding Morgan's Earth Stomp spell on YS293:
Would a (single target) spell similar to Harry's Gravitus (in Changes and It's My Birthday, Too) also be resisted with Might, instead of Athletics?

Also, how would a Zone-Wide attack be defended against, narratively? I mean, if for example Harry did a Zone-Wide Fuego, how could someone justify avoiding being hit by it, other than someone who would be able to dive out of the zone?

Gravitus has always given me heartache trying to simulate in game, because of the side-effect... one of my players wants to try an earth-mage with strong evocation, and I'm not sure how best to simulate it. IMO, it should be two simultaneous effects- one massive damage effect, fairly localized (single target or single zone), with surrounding zones taking a low-level maneuver to lose their footing. I could just call that fluff- but it's certainly big and noticeable if, say, someone tried it in a city.

On the upside, every time we've seen Gravitus, it's been closer in line with something thaumaturgy could do than evocation, systems-wise... it certainly seems to be more of a prep-work kind of spell with harry- having to gather power, focus his mind... affecting an area so large that not all of it can be within line of sight... that would solve it easy.

A lower-level version, I'd run as a direct attack, using evocation, and call it done.
Changes-grade... either involves a TON of FP and tags, or thaumaturgy.

And I'd make it resisted by Endurance (modified by Might) either way.


As for defending against zone attacks- easy... Cover. Dropping prone might even be enough, depending on the spell's visual description.