Targeting and control....

[computerking]

Or.. Noob Questions revisited!

I recently read the following exchanges in another thread:

Targeting question: I cast an 8-shift push, but I only roll 5 to control. I take 3 backlash to get the spell off. My opponent rolls an Athletics defence of 6. What happens?

He defends. Any time the defense is higher than your targeting roll the effect is avoided.

Hmm, you're right. I think I like the idea of a targeting roll for this one. Though I guess there's some advantage to doing it the other way.

I like the idea of a targeting roll for this too, actually. These evocation pushes are very attack-like.

I like the idea of a targeting roll as well. Think of it as an invisible hand pushing in a straight line - if the target moved away, it will miss.

OK, the way things sound, I may be doing something Way wrong. The way it seems here, targeting is totally separate from control on spells, instead of partially separate, in a way that only becomes obvious when splitting an attack. If taking backlash stress to meet the spell's control requirement doesn't also increase the targeting to that same level, there would be less of an incentive to take backlash, because you're going to have more of a chance of missing, anyway.  Now I only did a small amount of digging, but I found the following passage:

Example:  Harry  Dresden  is  beset  by  a charging Red Court vampire  intent on taking his  fool head of. He’s not  really happy about that, so he chooses to blast it of the planet with a fire evocation.
Harry  has  a Conviction  of Superb  (+5) and a Discipline of Good (+3). His player—Jim—decides he doesn’t want  to mess around with  this  thing  too  much,  so  he  chooses  to summon  up  8  shifts  of  power  for  the  spell. Harry has a power specialization in fire magic, so his Conviction is treated as Fantastic (+6) for  the purposes of  the spell. That means  that casting this spell will give him a 3-stress mental hit—one stress for everything up to 6, and then two more to get to 8.
The  difficulty  to  cast  the  spell  is Legendary  (+8).  That’s  high,  but  fortunately Harry’s blasting rod gives him a +1 to control,  so Jim  starts by rolling his Discipline at Great  (+4). He  gets  a +2,  for  a  total  of Fantastic (+6), and invokes Harry’s Wizard Private  Eye  aspect  to  give  him +2 more. This  controls  all  the  power  necessary  for  the spell, and aims the spell at his target at +8.
Harry  yells  “Fuego!”  as  he  points  his blasting  rod,  sending  a  column  of  fame  at the  vampire,  an  attack  at  Legendary  rated at Weapon:8.  The  vampire  rolls  to  defend against Harry’s  roll  of Legendary and  gets a Great (+4), which means the blast strikes home and  inflicts a 12-stress hit  on him  (4  for  the attack, 8 for the weapon value). The vampire’s Inhuman Toughness reduces  this  to 11 stress, and the vampire takes a severe consequence of Extra Crispy and a 5-stress physical hit.

Wouldn't the stress output be 10 not 12 if Harry's targeting roll was only counted as 6, not 8? And had the vampire rolled +7, would it have still been a hit?

One more passage:

The Discipline roll also controls spell targeting and sets the difficulty for defending against it.

For the life of me I can't find anything in the rules of backlash that says that covering a failed roll with backlash doesn't also cover targeting, since it's intended to cover the Discipline Roll Deficit, it sounds like it covers the targeting roll, as well.

Can anyone find anything in the RAW that supports the Targeting Roll separation?

[Sanctaphrax]

Harry's targeting roll in the example is 8. The control roll is also used as the targeting roll. Except with rotes, which have their targeting rolls made even though their control rolls are fixed.

I don't think backlash helps you aim, but it's conceivable that I'm wrong.

[UmbraLux]

Wouldn't the stress output be 10 not 12 if Harry's targeting roll was only counted as 6, not 8? And had the vampire rolled +7, would it have still been a hit?

In the example Harry invokes an aspect for a +2 to the control / targeting / attack roll.  So, as Sanctaphrax notes, the total is +8 and the damage has been calculated correctly.

One more passage:For the life of me I can't find anything in the rules of backlash that says that covering a failed roll with backlash doesn't also cover targeting, since it's intended to cover the Discipline Roll Deficit, it sounds like it covers the targeting roll, as well.

Can anyone find anything in the RAW that supports the Targeting Roll separation?

Power is a separate decision from targeting / control.  It even uses a separate skill (Conviction instead of Discipline).  The book standard is adding to one skill at a time.  Since that's a core assumption, I'm not sure there's anything explicit under evocation...if I find something I'll post a followup.

Edit:  YS255-256 covers gathering and controlling power in separate sections.  Gathering power allows you to increase power by "taking additional stress" up to and including consequences.  Notably, it does not call this backlash.  Controlling power allows you to take backlash to increase control.

It speaks of each separately and describes them with different terms.  That's probably as close as you'll get to an explicit "one point of stress doesn't add one to both power and control" statement.

[crusher_bob]

No, backlash doesn't add to your targeting roll.\

-----------------

Example 1:
Brutha has a base power of 7 and a base control of 7.  He tries to blast Vorbis with a power 7 attack, for one stress.

He rolls control and gets a total of 6.  He takes one point of backlash to keep the spell power at 7; the final attack is a power 7, targeting 6 attack.

----------------

Brutha has bothered to make his 'blast a heretic' spell into a rote (@ power 7).  He tries to cast if on Vorbis as a rote this time.  He again gets a total of 6 on the control roll.  But, as this was a rote, he automatically controls the power, so he doesn't need to worry about fallout or backlash.  So the final attack is power 7, targeting 6.

[Sanctaphrax]

I think someone's been reading Small Gods.

[UmbraLux]

No, backlash doesn't add to your targeting roll.

While it doesn't appear to be explicitly stated, comparing the two examples on YS257 seems to state differently.  Though, in many ways, I prefer your interpretation.  Wizards have plenty of power. 

[Vairelome]

While it doesn't appear to be explicitly stated, comparing the two examples on YS257 seems to state differently.  Though, in many ways, I prefer your interpretation.  Wizards have plenty of power. 

Harry must cast a spell with a Superb (+5) control target without using incantations or focus items.  Without these benefits, he fails the Discipline roll by 5.  He doesn't want to hurt anyone around him or cause any unintended environmental effects, and he needs the spell to succeed in full, so he chooses to take a 5-stress physical backlash.  He's already taken some physical stress during this scene, so he ends up having to take a moderate consequence of Utterly Exhausted in addition to a 1-stress physical hit.  Ouch.  But at least the spell is still cast at full power.

Harry Dresden is trying to cast a spirit (force) attack of Epic (+7) difficulty, defined as a Weapon:5 attack against an entire zone containing two bad guys.  But Harry mucks it up, rolling a Fair (+2) and missing the target by 5.  He's drained of resources at this point--he's taken consequences, spent most of his fate points, and has both stress tracks at least partially full.  Jim, his player, decides to let the five shifts go out as fallout and deal with a weaker spell.

Because Harry lost 5 shifts to fallout, the GM rules that Harry's attack is only a single target Weapon:2 attack at Fair.  The one opponent Harry is still able to target dodges that easily.

As to the effect of the fallout, the GM rules that Harry blew out a support wall in the building, putting an aspect of Crumbling Building on the scene.  Now, not only is he on his last legs in this fight, but he has to deal with the whole building falling down around him...

I read those examples differently than you did.  Note that while the fallout example specifically states that Harry's spell is a zone attack, the backlash example states that Harry is casting "a spell"--no mention of attack anywhere in the example.  Also, in the first example, the control target difficulty is stated up front, before the spell is even cast, and is not described as a defense roll of any type.  It looks to me to be more consistent with maneuvering to place a very important scene aspect (possibly with multiple compels factored in; the "without using incantations or focus items" bit screams compel to me, so the Superb difficulty might be similar in origin).

[sinker]

My inclination is to say that backlash doesn't add to the targeting roll, because of how it's described. Look at this.

Any uncontrolled power taken as backlash
remains a part of the spell and does not reduce
its effect. Fallout is different: every shift of
fallout reduces the effect of the spell.

"Remains a part of the spell and does not reduce it's effect." That seems to be describing the spell and it's power only. It says nothing about targeting or even about the discipline roll at all.

As others have pointed out, in your example Harry succeeds. He has no need for backlash.

[UmbraLux]

I'm a bit mixed.  I want to buy your interpretation - it would reign in casters to a degree.  But you've actually pointed out the quote that has me leaning towards allowing addition to the targeting roll.  Specifically, "...does not reduce it's effect."  Missing certainly would reduce the effect.   

The rules could probably be interpreted either way.  However, from things Fred has said about consequences adding to rolls, I think spending backlash to increase the targeting roll was the intent.  Besides, if it didn't, you would seldom, if ever, choose to take backlash on an attack. 

[zenten]

I don't run with backlash helping on the targetting roll, and the Wizard in the group takes backlash all the time, both with spells that require targetting rolls and those that don't.

[sinker]

My point was that power does not effect targeting. The quote says that "...Power taken as backlash remains a part of the spell..." Seems pretty clear to me.

[UmbraLux]

...the Wizard in the group takes backlash all the time...

I'd question the wizard's competence, but I suspect you're exaggerating a bit.     I guess the real question is, how often does the wizard take backlash on an attack that misses? 

[zenten]

Rarely, because she pretty much never misses, and if she does it's because of a bunch of back and forth invokes between her and the bad guy, and she just ran out of Fate points, but still far exceeds the power of the spell.  I think she did once though because she was worried about hurting her allies.

[zenten]

Anyway, she backlashes often because she sets the power of her spells so damn high.  It's not uncommon for her to bring up more than 10 shifts, and she doesn't have any Refinement.

[Silverblaze]

I bet she nukes stuff good and proper though.