Holding Someone Down

[ways and means]

In a lot of books and tv I have seen one of the more cool tropes is the hold down where a character sacrifices themselves to hold an enemy still in the path of a big explosion/ energy beam, bullet etc. Now originally I thought that the best way to model this in the game was via a grapple (grabbing on to somebody and limiting there actions). But according to the grapple rules you cannot block a defensive action which would mean your having grabbed an opponent will do nothing to stop them dodging the massive zone wide explody energy  attack (even though being grappled there is no way they should be able to move out the way of the attack). So how could you model such a move in game with the current mechanics?

[sinker]

Seems like aspects and compels would likely be the best way to reach that goal. It seems weird, but with fate you have to look more at the final product than the process. You want to limit someone's defensive options? A compel is the only way to do it.

[Sanctaphrax]

The mechanics here don't seem weird to me at all, actually.

Anyway, I suggest that you combine the aspect application option of grappling with a houserule that I think was originally proposed by devonapple. Said houserule says that you can take a consequence to boost a roll by the consequence value.

[sinker]

Said houserule says that you can take a consequence to boost a roll by the consequence value.

Right, I forgot about that one. That's a good one.

[noretoc]

Or offer a concession to the GM.  "I'll get Taken out and killed if I can take him with me."

[ways and means]

Tag mechanics seem the way to do (though I do like the Concession Idea) thanks all. The reason I find the current system odd is that someone can dodge something when it would be impossible to do so in this example someone couldn't leave the zone because they are grappled and couldn't move because they are grappled and yet are fully capable of dodging and area effect.

[devonapple]

Tag mechanics seem the way to do (though I do like the Concession Idea) thanks all. The reason I find the current system odd is that someone can dodge something when it would be impossible to do so and it makes snare traps and other blocks like that useless.

The GM is allowed to set up challenges which result in a direct Consequence. Making all skill checks operate that way removes the players' power over their personal narrative, so challenges for effect (I think that's what they are called in the rules) should be used with discretion. But for things like snare traps serving as a narrative pacing and plot mechanism (rather than as a setup to take out a character, as it would be in a D&D game or the like), GMs don't always have to go to the Stress Track to advance the plot.

As for the OP maneuver of "I'm taking you with me," that sounds very much like either a Concession or a Taken Out situation, and the context would be important. Mind you: not everyone could do that. Harry wouldn't necessarily be able to physically grapple a Troll into the path of an insta-kill effect.*



*Unless it somehow made for an interesting story.

[sinker]

The reason I find the current system odd is that someone can dodge something when it would be impossible to do so in this example someone couldn't leave the zone because they are grappled and couldn't move because they are grappled and yet are fully capable of dodging and area effect.

Something to consider is that from a narrative standpoint a zone-wide attack does not actually fill the zone. It makes the whole zone dangerous, but you aren't for example filling an entire ten-by-ten-by-ten cube with fire. That's how you get people dodging without leaving the zone, and people taking consequences that don't fit the attack (but do fit escaping the attack).

[Tedronai]

If you want the attack to be inescapable, make sure it has an attack effort of at least 5 more than the highest defense stat of those targeted.

[devonapple]

If you want the attack to be inescapable, make sure it has an attack effort of at least 5 more than the highest defense stat of those targeted.

And if you want it to be unsurvivable, make the total shifts of effect 25 + highest defense stat + highest applicable stress track.

[Sanctaphrax]

If you can dodge the attack without leaving the zone, then why should not being able to leave the zone prevent you from dodging?

PS: Are you sure that you can't move while grappled? It seems to me that a sprint attempt that beats the grapple strength would work just fine.

[ways and means]

Dodging isn't blocked by a grapple, movement is blocked by a grapple in my opinion dodging should probably require you to be able to move which is why I find the fact that grapples don't effect dodging weird, the same as if someone tried to parry with their hands cuffed behind their back.

Aspect tagging is the way to go, probably aspects like "helpless", "held down" or "Human (replace to fit) Shield" would work.

[The Mighty Buzzard]

Dodging isn't blocked by a grapple, movement is blocked by a grapple in my opinion dodging should probably require you to be able to move which is why I find the fact that grapples don't effect dodging weird, the same as if someone tried to parry with their hands cuffed behind their back.

Eh, it's not too much of a stretch.  Sticking the person grappling you between yourself and harm is still a dodge.  Dodging as a pair is possible too since the guy grappling you isn't going to want to be hit by friendly fire.

[polkaneverdies]

Buzzards description would be how I would normally picture the grappled aoe dodge.