An end to the debate

[Mr. Death]

So we've gone back and forth about whether taking backlash counts toward the targeting roll for an attack spell, and there's arguments for (a Weapon:5+ spell is mostly useless if it's only a 1 to dodge; taking the backlash logically means you're forcing the spell where you want it to go) and against (makes high-level magic nigh-impossible to dodge, while wizards are already overpowered).

I'm reading the Paranet Papers more closely today, and this example more or less settles things.

According to that example, if you roll a 6 and take 4 shifts of backlash to control a Weapon:10 spell, the attack roll is still a 6.

(And it would figure that I'd discover this limitation on wizards just as I'm about to start playing as one.)

[Taran]

Your example is always as I'd interpreted it.

Backlash does not affect targeting at all.  You take backlash in order to make sure the spell goes off without a hitch (as long as taking damage isn't counted a hitch)

Even fallout doesn't affect targeting.  It only affects the Power of the spell.

As far as I know nothing affects targeting.  The only thing you can do against a wizard casting a spell is put a block against the attack and hope it's high enough to prevent the attack.  Especially when they're swinging weapon 10 power.

The only thing I can think of that hinders spellcasting sufficiently is Grappling.  Which changes the control roll of the spell equal to the block.  It effectively raises the 'Power' of the spell.  Which doesn't really matter if you're already swinging around Power 10 spells.  And, for attacks, if the block is higher than your 6 target control,  the spell is blocked anyways.

(And it would figure that I'd discover this limitation on wizards just as I'm about to start playing as one.)

How is this a limitation?  I ask because I don't understand how you were doing it before.  I don't understand this example:

(a Weapon:5+ spell is mostly useless if it's only a 1 to dodge; taking the backlash logically means you're forcing the spell where you want it to go)

makes high-level magic nigh-impossible to dodge

But yeah, high control is almost always more important than high Power. (at least for attacks)

[Mr. Death]

The way we'd been playing it, if I had cast a Weapon:5 spell, rolled a 1, then took the backlash, we treated the attack roll as a 5. We did this on the basis of, the wizard was paying the price to "force" the spell to do what he wanted (i.e., to hit what he's aiming at), so he'd get the boost.

What I meant by that example was, if I cast a Weapon:5 spell and roll a 1, there's no incentive to take backlash -- just about anything out there worth hitting with a Weapon:5 attack is going to dodge a 1, meaning it's taking an extra hit for no real benefit.

It honestly rarely made practical difference in my games. My players tended to make sure they had aspects to tag or fate points to spend anyway. When they did have to take backlash, it was usually 1 or 2 shifts and even with this clarification in play, that just meant their target had to try to dodge a 12 instead of a 14 (things get a little nuts in a 16-refresh game). Of course, the badguys had the rule too, which helped keep them challenging (for whatever reason, whether I'm using physical dice or an IRC bot, my villains tend to roll terribly in climactic fights).

[Cadd]

The case of rolling a 1 for a 5 power spell will still bring the question of taking Backlash, as the only alternative is accepting 4 shifts of Fallout along with the likely-dogded spell. This can cause worse problems than a 4 stress hit...

[Taran]

The case of rolling a 1 for a 5 power spell will still bring the question of taking Backlash, as the only alternative is accepting 4 shifts of Fallout along with the likely-dogded spell. This can cause worse problems than a 4 stress hit...

A 4 shift fallout will put something interesting on the scene.  A 4 shift hit of backlash with an accuracy 1 attack is just shooting yourself in the foot.  You are guaranteed to miss so why take stress?  Unless there are bystanders, it's just doesn't make sense.

[Mr. Death]

A 4 shift fallout will put something interesting on the scene.  A 4 shift hit of backlash with an accuracy 1 attack is just shooting yourself in the foot.  You are guaranteed to miss so why take stress?  Unless there are bystanders, it's just doesn't make sense.

Yeah -- the absence of that consideration in Your Story's example is part of the reason I thought it worked the other way.

As I recall, the example for fallout and how it works is Harry sending a 5-shift spell at a vampire and rolling a 2. And while the example goes through the other reasons to go for fallout instead of taking backlash (That Harry has already taken stress, etc.) it doesn't say anything about how a roll of 2 is unlikely to hit a vampire, which would make the decision a no-brainer even if Harry hadn't taken any stress already.

[dragoonbuster]

it doesn't say anything about how a roll of 2 is unlikely to hit a vampire, which would make the decision a no-brainer even if Harry hadn't taken any stress already.

Those sorts of decisions and strategic deductions are left to Harry's player.

[Taran]

I don't think I've ever played a character that used fallout.

If it's an attack, you want to boost accuracy so you're, naturally, going to lessen the amount of fallout/backlash you take anyways when you spend FPs and tag aspects.

If it's a maneuver or, especially, a block, you don't want to sacrifice shifts of Power to fallout so it's almost always better to use backlash.

[Mr. Death]

Those sorts of decisions and strategic deductions are left to Harry's player.

Yes. Which is why the example discusses all those things except what appears to be one of the most pertinent ones.

Since an example in the game book is supposed to illustrate the factors that go into a given mechanic, it's conspicuous in its absence.

[Fenix Wulfheart]

I've had GMs OK my spending a Fate Point to dictate what happens with the Fallout in an interesting way, which concidentally set up a shiny new tag for later. Basically the GM let me "salvage" three of the shifts of Fallout for something else and then he ran with the rest (it was a Weapon 14 Ice attack and I controlled only 6. High level play, and the Fallout's aspect was more useful than the high damage output, esp. since the attack missed anyway). We had an interesting blizzard show up, and the ice formed up in rings around the enemy where the attack sprayed loose as it missed. Visibility became crap, but that didn't matter much that time XD