Block, Counterspell and the like

[Becq]

Such a use of Discipline requires a Stunt.

Evocation already, in effect, adds a 'trapping' to the Discipline skill to allow it to control magical energy.  Why would you need another stunt to do so?  Note also that the example I referenced did not indicate that Guns could only be used that way if a trapping was added via a stunt...

Again, this is just my opinion, your GM might disagree, and that's fine.  But given that DFRPG encourages coming up with creative ways to use skills, I think that this as a house rule would be easily within the spirit of the rules, and would be reasonable from a game balance perspective.  After all, if you can justify defending against lockpicking by using Guns skill, how hard is it to justify defending against spells with magical skill?

[Belial666]

It allows control of your own energy. Much like, say, "guns" allows you to control your own gun.

To control your enemy's gun you'd need a pretty pricey power. To use "guns" to defend you'd need a stunt.

[stitchy1503]

I dont know if i'd say that, couldnt you use the guns skill in a block, for instance "cover fire"?

[babel2uk]

I dont know if i'd say that, couldnt you use the guns skill in a block, for instance "cover fire"?

Yes, I'm fairly certain there's an example of that in the rule book. It's a block applied to a particular maneuver (spraying bullets into a doorway to stop someone escaping through it, in the case of the example). I could quite easily see that changed to a block on shooting and movement placed on a particular person or small area (depending on the size and rate of fire of the gun) - that may even be stated in the example in the book. That is an action though, not a reaction. It's not something you could decide to do as someone shoots at you - you'd need to use your own action to place the block before your enemy opens fire this exchange. I think Belial666 was meaning that you couldn't use guns as a form of dodge roll (i.e. reaction to the incoming fire) - I may be wrong though.

In my opinion it's the same thing for Counterspelling. It's not something you should be able to use reactively - there's too much analysis involved.