Author Topic: Weapons ratings and blocks  (Read 6623 times)

Offline ways and means

  • Posty McPostington
  • ***
  • Posts: 1783
  • What Lies in the Truth, what truth in the Lies.
    • View Profile
Weapons ratings and blocks
« on: July 10, 2012, 06:42:26 PM »
Having read the argument over on the extreme complexity thread I noticed a problem with the current blocking rules especially when they relate to magic and non- magic barriers. This Problem was illustrated when Richard talked about get through a ward by shooting bigger guns at it. Given how the game mechanics works shooting a Ground to Air Missile at that ward would be as effective as hitting it with a pencil as long as the attack rolls were the same.  This seems a little odd because a ground to air missile should be harder to defend against than a pencil even if both are wielded by masters.

Also wards have a minor problem/ feature that in game they can deflect lower level attacks indefinitely and better wards could easily sideline armies. 
« Last Edit: July 10, 2012, 07:42:16 PM by ways and means »
Every night has its day.
Even forever must come to an end....
I think.

Offline YPU

  • Participant
  • *
  • Posts: 45
    • View Profile
Re: Weapons ratings and blocks
« Reply #1 on: July 10, 2012, 06:51:09 PM »
Remember that point in the books that is mentioned as harry taking an extreme consequence? With the hand and the fire? His shield stopped the napalm but not its heat as I recall? I am pretty sure that is what would happen with a surface to air missile, the attack would stop short of the caster, but the explosion would still effect the whole zone that he was in. And the next depending on the type of missile were talking about.
Your Personal Undead

Offline Becq

  • Posty McPostington
  • ***
  • Posts: 1253
    • View Profile
Re: Weapons ratings and blocks
« Reply #2 on: July 10, 2012, 07:32:16 PM »
The rules can lead to amusing conclusions when wards are involved.  Consider what would happen if nuclear missile was launched, and there happened to be a ward somewhere in the blast radius.  The attack roll would almost certainly be below the ward rating, so the blast would be reflected back against the silo that launched the missile, potentially thousands of miles away...

Offline Lamech

  • Participant
  • *
  • Posts: 71
    • View Profile
Re: Weapons ratings and blocks
« Reply #3 on: July 10, 2012, 08:41:10 PM »
High Powered Explosives, Landmines and Missiles should be treated as a crafting roll based attack IMO, and can hit significant levels of extra time and assistance aspects. Consider a scientist with crafting three, taking four units of extra time (has a stunt to reduce time by two steps), who has Assistance, the high concept chemist and made a Scholarship roll for Good Plans. Its probably a 13 shift shot. A good ward will reflect it, but in all honesty? A good block can shunt stuff into the Nevernever. So a really good ward should be able to block nuke level attacks (although the spiritual component of a nuke might do something nasty to magic at GM discretion).

I do however agree that its a problem that wards can stop big and small attacks equally well. It makes no sense, and is contrary to the books for normal defenses. (The Nevernever shunting not so much.)

On the wards not losing power. I think that is sort a the RPG wards not really lining up with the book wards, I don't recall many wards that deflect energy like the standard ones. Harry set up something that was specifically supposed to deflect magic, but most wards seem to be the landmine kind. Maybe the GM could use something similar to the time chart for a sustained assault.
« Last Edit: July 10, 2012, 08:54:54 PM by Lamech »

Offline wolff96

  • Participant
  • *
  • Posts: 80
    • View Profile
Re: Weapons ratings and blocks
« Reply #4 on: July 10, 2012, 09:38:36 PM »
Also wards have a minor problem/ feature that in game they can deflect lower level attacks indefinitely and better wards could easily sideline armies.

I seem to recall a passage in one of the books (Dead Beat, IIRC) where the Merlin temporarily stalled an entire army -- one that included a horde of the Red Court, a few demons, and possibly some Outsiders -- with a single, impromptu Ward.  Leading to the immortal line of: "I guess you don't get to be Merlin of the White Council by collecting bottle caps."  So I'd say that part is pretty faithful to the books.  :)

I agree that the missile thing is weird.

Offline Sanctaphrax

  • White Council
  • Seriously?
  • ****
  • Posts: 12405
    • View Profile
Re: Weapons ratings and blocks
« Reply #5 on: July 10, 2012, 10:43:29 PM »
If it bugs you, I suggest giving Wards armour and stress and consequences instead of the block value that they have now.

PS: I think nukes have massive attack rolls and low weapon ratings, actually. They don't miss much, but it is possible to get hit without being vaporized.

Offline Orladdin

  • Conversationalist
  • **
  • Posts: 514
  • The Undauntable
    • View Profile
Re: Weapons ratings and blocks
« Reply #6 on: July 11, 2012, 01:52:33 PM »
If it bugs you, I suggest giving Wards armour and stress and consequences instead of the block value that they have now.
Yeah, an example of the FATE fractal1 at work.  Build wards like a character.

PS: I think nukes have massive attack rolls and low weapon ratings, actually. They don't miss much, but it is possible to get hit without being vaporized.

Both of these are fine ways to look at it, I think.  Just use the one that has the complexity you want. 

Plan on using Nukes a lot and need quick and dirty rules for them? (I wonder what kind of game this would be, but...)  Then give them a ridiculously high attack bonus, no weapon rating.  Plan to have a single nuke be a major plot point as the PC wizard and his team try frantically to make a ward that can save themselves?  Make the building of the ward a major event and spec it out as a character.



1 - The FATE Fractal on faterpg.com  A great read for FATE GMs.
There is never a blanket answer to an ethical question.  This includes the Laws of Magic.

Perpetrator of The Cold Days Release FAQ

"I never make stupid mistakes. Only very, very clever ones."
-- The Doctor, Timewyrm: Genesys

Offline Praxidicae

  • Participant
  • *
  • Posts: 72
    • View Profile
Re: Weapons ratings and blocks
« Reply #7 on: July 12, 2012, 10:14:16 AM »
The rules can lead to amusing conclusions when wards are involved.  Consider what would happen if nuclear missile was launched, and there happened to be a ward somewhere in the blast radius.  The attack roll would almost certainly be below the ward rating, so the blast would be reflected back against the silo that launched the missile, potentially thousands of miles away...
Its cases like these that have left me tempted to House Rule the use "Power Tier" rules from Strange Fate (Kerberos Club). However it's never actually come up in-game, so I've not had to see how well the system would mesh with DFRPG.

Offline GryMor

  • Conversationalist
  • **
  • Posts: 224
    • View Profile
Re: Weapons ratings and blocks
« Reply #8 on: July 12, 2012, 08:11:26 PM »
I personally think this is a good thing. It leaves wards vulnerable on a personal scale to someone actively trying to punch through them and willing to do the prep while making the useful on the strategic scale against attacks not actually anticipating wards.

Also, I 'like' the image of a glassed city with a sprinkling of undamaged oasis, each starting a spoke of merely burned and irradiated land (as opposed to glassed) in their shadow.

Offline Becq

  • Posty McPostington
  • ***
  • Posts: 1253
    • View Profile
Re: Weapons ratings and blocks
« Reply #9 on: July 13, 2012, 12:34:58 AM »
I personally think this is a good thing. It leaves wards vulnerable on a personal scale to someone actively trying to punch through them and willing to do the prep while making the useful on the strategic scale against attacks not actually anticipating wards.
Ok, silly hypothetical.  Bob the wizard pisses off Dmitri the former KGB agent turned terrorist.  Dmitri has already contracted to deliver a briefcase nuke to Chicago, but now he's going for two-for-the-price-of-one.  He knows Bob is a wizard and will have defenses ... but he has a frickin' briefcase nuke!

So he hops on a plane, gets strip-searched at the airport, but the TSA doesn't find any spare tubes of toothpaste in his shoes or underwear, so they let him through with his briefcase "computer".  He heads over to Bob's house and hides the briefcase behind some bushes next to Bob's apartment.  Then he flies to India, and uses his cell phone's autodialer to figuratively press the big red button.

Ok, mechanics time.  This would probably count as using demolitions (crafting stunt, I think) which Dmitri doesn't have (he knows how to autodial, though), so the attack roll is probably around 0.  Bob has strength 4 ward (he's better at pissing people off than casting wards).  Even so, the attack roll is lower that the ward strength, so the blast gets deflected to India, incinerating Dmitri.

I have to admit, this is not satisfactory to me.  I'm thinking that the way to handle these sorts of things (anything from grenades on up to nukes) is to treat them as creating an "environmental hazard" (YS325) of some sort -- with suitably high hazard ratings (ie, equivalent of an attack roll).

Offline Rougarou

  • Conversationalist
  • **
  • Posts: 113
  • Just like Disneyland.
    • View Profile
Re: Weapons ratings and blocks
« Reply #10 on: July 13, 2012, 02:27:49 AM »
Agree with Becq here. When in doubt, I always use the reasonableness standard to determine things like this.

To me, the weapon rating of a spell is one of the few weapon ratings a ward should ignore. I can see that this makes sense since even if the spell as a lot of power, if it's poorly controlled it might not have the cohesiveness required to overcome the ward. A flamethrower on the other hand is a flamethrower. The skill of the person wielding it has little effect on the end results. Ditto claymore mines, hand grenades... really any highly destructive weapons.

I also don't see a ward as being capable of deflecting a nuclear strike back to the place it was launched/triggered from. There is no mystical element to a nuclear strike, no magical connection between the attack and the attacker that the ward can send the energy back down. In my opinion, wards should only reflect physical attacks back at the attacker if the attacker is present. On the other hand, a ward would easily be able to send a thaumaturgical attack right back at the caster.. there is such a channel open between the attack and the attacker then.
"So you fought a hobo who tried to use a ritual to make himself a god?"
"We called him Hobosus."
"What?"
"Hobo plus Jesus. Hobosus."
- From a DFRPG campaign.

Offline GryMor

  • Conversationalist
  • **
  • Posts: 224
    • View Profile
Re: Weapons ratings and blocks
« Reply #11 on: July 13, 2012, 03:06:38 AM »
I'd be more inclined to treat an attack roll from a nuke that misses normal humans that don't tag anything and get a 0 on their dice as a failure to trigger the nuke at all. Additionally, wards reflect attacks back to their sources. While with spells, bullets and punches that is the actual attacker, with explosives, that should be the thing that is exploding.

Offline Richard_Chilton

  • Posty McPostington
  • ***
  • Posts: 2400
    • View Profile
Re: Weapons ratings and blocks
« Reply #12 on: July 13, 2012, 05:16:40 AM »
I'm sure that some wizards were hit during the mass bombing campaigns of WWII.

Looking at weapons is a bit narrow when talking about things that alter the environment to an extreme degree.

When I think nuke, I think of four attacks - since nuclear explosions have 4 steps.  See here for details about 1 megaton air blast (some things would have a small radius if not an air blast), but basically:
1) Flash and Fireball
- looking in the wrong direction and you see the flash
- heat radiation (houses within 14 kilometers are on fire)
- X-ray pulse (kills people up to 3 kilometers away)
- after the flash, the forming fireball release blinding bright flashes - blinding those 80 kilometers away
- the intensity of the light itself will burn those within 10 kilometers (and some people will leave shadows a wall)

Blast:
- moves slower than the flash and fireball (seperate attack)
- shifts earth and houses up to 14 kilometers away - without a deep foundation the heaviest warded building is going to be tossed around.
- change in air pressure kills everyone within 3 kilometers and 50% of those within 8 kilometers
- Hurricane strengh winds are hitting that warded building.

Firestorm
- moves slower than the blast (separate attack).
- burns up all available oxygen
- temperatures rise above lethal levels
- strong wind push the fires faster than humans can run

Delayed Radiation Fallout
- can you say cancer?


Harry almost lost his hand when his protection spell failed to deflect heat.  Who wards against x-rays? If background heat is warded against, does that mean you have a perfectly insulated house and need to find a way to vent excess heat (the way spacesuits must)? Would a ward prevent the oxygen from being sucked out of a house? And can you ward against background radiation?

Maybe it's time to look at Ward vs Environment.  Would a ward protect your house in the middle of forest fire? Would it divert a deluge that threatens to flood you out? Would it deflect a tornado?

I'd say the environment would eventually wear down any ward - but maybe that's just me.

Richard

Offline Bernd

  • Participant
  • *
  • Posts: 48
    • View Profile
Re: Weapons ratings and blocks
« Reply #13 on: July 13, 2012, 08:53:00 AM »
I like the idea of other Fate-Variants that explosives (or all effects that affect the whole zone) don’t receive a Weapon Rating, but a bonus of equal value to the attack roll instead. So a nuke would have a attack bonus of 1000. Dodge that. It also bursts any ward ever created, which makes sense to me.

With that, explosives don’t deal as much damage as if they had a Weapon Rating (assuming they hit), but they are not as easy to dodge (with the effect of receiving no damage at all).

Offline Sanctaphrax

  • White Council
  • Seriously?
  • ****
  • Posts: 12405
    • View Profile
Re: Weapons ratings and blocks
« Reply #14 on: July 14, 2012, 08:40:59 AM »
1000 seems like too much...the best figures I can find indicate that Little Boy only killed a fourth of Hiroshima.

Nukes are impressive because of the number of things they can hit at once, not because of the damage they do to each thing they hit. If you aren't too close to the bomb, they're survivable.