Do blocks worth the efforts?

[Leeder]

Before starting the DFRPG campaign, I played sci-fi Fate Core game, and, in retrospect, I like the DFRPG rules much more than Fate Core. But some things confused me in Fate Core and continue doing that in DFRPG.

I'm talking about blocks.

We can use blocks in two ways: to prevent somebody from being hurt or to prevent somebody to doing something. Nevertheless, the Strength of the block depends on the initial roll. Assuming yojimbo (yes, I like the Legend of the Five Rings, so let some oriental terms be) has Weapons skill at 4, his opponent ninja has Weapons at 4 as well, and an yojimbo's ally courtier has Athletics at 5.

Yojimbo (bodyguard in English) tries to prevent his opponent ninja from hurting the courtier. He rolls -1 on his dice and sets Block at Strength 3. What does it mean? If the opponent's roll for attack the courtier is lower than 3, he missed. But even if the yojimbo haven't established the Block, that low attack result could do not much harm to the courtier! And if the ninja rolls high result, the block don't do much profit...

It's clear for me thanks to the example that there are two possible variants. First: I didn't get what blocks are and how to use them. Second: blocks suck. I hope the first one is true, and rely on you guys to remove the scales from my eyes .

[Sanctaphrax]

It's the first one. You've picked a situation where a block isn't a good idea.

Blocks are situational, but they can be very useful.

That courtier is really good at dodging, so he doesn't need a block.

But if the yojimbo was protecting a different courtier, one with Mediocre Athletics, then a block would be very advisable. Especially if the yojimbo had allies who could attack the ninja while he protected the courtier or if there were a bunch of ninjas who could collectively cut an unprotected courtier to ribbons in one round.

[Cadd]

There's one more thing that you've missed. If the attack doesn't beat the block, there's no hit of course. But if it does beat the block, the attack roll is still reduced by the rating of the block.

So If the Ninja rolls say 6 and thus beats Yojimbos block, it's still only a result of 3 that's applied to the courtier.

Of course, as Sancta pointed out, stepping in and blocking to protect a person with a defensive skill higher than what you can roll for a block, and against a single opponent, is not the best moment for a block.

[Leeder]

So any benefit from a block I can gain only if I have low defense skill? And that block does nothing to man, already good at dodging? And there is no difference between Good Dodger, defending with a block and without it (except a hypothetical worse-than-Terrible rolls)?

Cadd, don't you mean that the block reduces the attack, do you? If you don't, the Strength of the block is insignificant, 'cause the Courtier will dodge the blow anyway.

[Cadd]

The result of the attack roll is reduced by the block rating, yes. So if the Ninja with Weapons 4 rolls +2, for a total of 8, this would then be reduced by Yojimbo's block of 3 for a final result of 5.

The block will basically function as a "backup" defense roll for the target of the attack, in the end using whichever is higher. I find the example on p210 of Your Story pretty good at making clear.

Basically, some tactically good moments to use a block against attacks:
*) When the person being defended has a marked lower chance of getting a good defense roll than your block roll. (your skill is higher, you have aspects to invoke, you have stunts boosting it, etc)
*) When there are several characters that can benefit from the block, thus freeing them up to focus more on taking out the attacker(s)

[Leeder]

There is some sort of contradiction in your message, Cadd. Or "whichever is higher", or "roll is reduces".

Upd. Maybe under "reducing" you mean "treat the block strength as the defense result"?

Basically, some tactically good moments to use a block against attacks:
*) When the person being defended has a marked lower chance of getting a good defense roll than your block roll. (your skill is higher, you have aspects to invoke, you have stunts boosting it, etc)
*) When there are several characters that can benefit from the block, thus freeing them up to focus more on taking out the attacker(s)

I've got it. Maybe the scene I've described, better to represent with maneuver, placing the "Guarded" aspect on the Courtier?

[Cadd]

What I meant with "reduces" is that it's not an all-or-nothing thing.

Yojimbo performs a Block action, end result is strength 3
Ninja attacks Courtier, Ninja rolls 6 (including stunts)
 -Courtier rolls Athletics for defense but only gets 2; elects to instead use Yojimbo's Block 3 for her defense.
Ninjas attack results in a 3 stress hit (before any weapon rating). Ninjas attack of 6, reduced by the block to 3.

If Courtiers defense roll had ended up at 4, she could use that result (instead of the block) to defend against Ninja


For the maneuver-idea - Absolutely! Since Courtier has such high Athletics, a maneuver placing "Guarded" on her, that she can tag if her defense roll is too low is probably going to be more effective. Maybe (depending on circumstances and GM approval) Yojimbo can even invoke that aspect next exchange to go on the counter-offensive against the Ninja?

[Mr. Death]

Yeah, you've got to look at the numbers and the situation to decide if a block is worth it. I find, generally speaking, it's better to block things kind of...sideways, I guess. Instead of directly blocking a Superb boxer from attacking you with fists, make a block that restricts based on a different, lower skill. My players have gotten a lot of mileage out of blocking perception (can't hit what you can't see) when they're up against things with Superb or higher attack and defense ratings.

If you decide to block, it pays to invest in it, either via stunts to boost your blocks, or through invoking aspects. A grapple made with a couple invokes made a huge difference in my own game last session, as it kept an enemy mage from casting for a couple rounds while the PCs sorted themselves out.

[Haru]

Yeah, you've got to look at the numbers and the situation to decide if a block is worth it. I find, generally speaking, it's better to block things kind of...sideways, I guess. Instead of directly blocking a Superb boxer from attacking you with fists, make a block that restricts based on a different, lower skill. My players have gotten a lot of mileage out of blocking perception (can't hit what you can't see) when they're up against things with Superb or higher attack and defense ratings.

You can't say "you have to beat this block with X, before you can do Y". A block can basically be broken by any skill it restricts, so if you put up a block against attacks, then an attack can break that block. If you put up a block against something else, say movement, your opponent would be able to attack you without being hindered by the block, but a successful attack wouldn't break the block, either. If you go to the next zone and attack him from there, he has to break the block, before he can change the zone and attack you again.

Something like what you are describing would make more sense as an invoke for effect. In essence, it wouldn't be much different, you do a maneuver like "sand in the eyes", and if it sticks, you can tag it for the effect that the target can not attack, as long as the aspect sticks to him. Though I would e careful with that.

[Mr. Death]

The way I look at it, the attacking skill isn't what is being restricted, what's restricted is a sort of prerequisite for attacking in the first place. As I said, you can't attack what you can't see or reach.

A veil, for instance, is specifically described in the books as a special type of block that defends against attacks via blocking perception instead of blocking the attack physically. This, to me, says that you can prevent an attack indirectly, while still using blocks.

Granted, the thing about blocking Athletics wasn't the best example, because athletics and attack kind of physically overlap.

An example I used in the thread on veils...say you've got a White Court vampire, who uses Incite Emotion on a target to induce a fear of heights as a block. The block ends up at 4 shifts, a psychological block to keep someone else--who has weak mental defenses, but Athletics at 5--from leaping from one rooftop to another.

Do you let the guy just roll Athletics and easily beat the block, even though the block is specifically psychological in nature? Or does the block hold because he can't break through the mental block?

[Leeder]

Wait a minute, please. If someone makes a block, preventing his enemy from seeing the enemy's target, the enemy must break the block using his "perception" abilities (maybe something other than simple Investigation, but that depends highly on the situation, so let's assume than he needs Investigation roll). But the enemy wants to attack! What should he do? Complicate the attack with his Investigation? Two distinct rolls? Or he simply looses his action? O_o

[Mr. Death]

Wait a minute, please. If someone makes a block, preventing his enemy from seeing the enemy's target, the enemy must break the block using his "perception" abilities (maybe something other than simple Investigation, but that depends highly on the situation, so let's assume than he needs Investigation roll). But the enemy wants to attack! What should he do? Complicate the attack with his Investigation? Two distinct rolls? Or he simply looses his action? O_o

Depends on the enemy, and the nature of the veil. If it's one of Molly's invisibility things, it doesn't make sense for him to 'lose' the action by swinging at air unless it's a particularly dumb minion.

There's plenty of options--go on defense, anticipating the veil being used for an attack; use some kind of maneuver to boost your next perception roll or get around the veil (like the Ick throwing a can of paint at her); attacking the whole zone the veiler was last seen in to try and smoke them out (had a dragon do this last night, setting a faerie marsh ablaze when his targets suddenly disappeared--they were mostly saved from that by other defensive magics and a blown roll by the dragon); if it's more like Molly's illusion in Ghost Story, a spray attack at every version you can see in the hopes of hitting one of them.

But generally speaking, I feel that letting the enemy directly attack when they did not beat the veil misses the point of the veil mechanics described in the book.

[Haru]

An example I used in the thread on veils...say you've got a White Court vampire, who uses Incite Emotion on a target to induce a fear of heights as a block. The block ends up at 4 shifts, a psychological block to keep someone else--who has weak mental defenses, but Athletics at 5--from leaping from one rooftop to another.

Do you let the guy just roll Athletics and easily beat the block, even though the block is specifically psychological in nature? Or does the block hold because he can't break through the mental block?

I do, because that's how blocks work. If the block is intended to keep him from coming after me, then he can still try to come after me, but he has to beat the block to do so. Incite just gives me the power to put up a block with a mental skill instead of a physical one.
If the difficulty of the jump was 3 and my block is 4, I have increased the difficulty for the other character. If he is a top athlete or even has a speed power, then even a weak jump will be enough to succeed. Just because I am not as good at the skill I am attacking him with doesn't mean I can just make him suck.

Now if you do this as a maneuver instead, you can easily target the weaker mental skills, since it is an opposed roll. If you succeed, the aspect is yours to work with. You can tag it on the jump roll to increase the difficulty of the jump by 2. You could even negotiate a tag for effect and a compel for the character to simply not jump and let you get away. Or you could go for an attack to take your opponent out of the chase scene.

It's the same thing for a veil. The other guy might be attacking randomly, but because he is good or lucky or can throw attacks very fast, he can cover a lot of ground and might still hit you if you are veiled. The best thing you can do when you are veiled and don't want to get hit is to get out of the zone, so you are no longer a viable target. Veiling, in essence, is your defense against being attacked. The roll to find you and attack you is done in one roll with the attack roll. Of course you could do an investigation or alertness maneuver first, to get a feel for where your target is, but it isn't mandatory.

[Mr. Death]

I do, because that's how blocks work. If the block is intended to keep him from coming after me, then he can still try to come after me, but he has to beat the block to do so. Incite just gives me the power to put up a block with a mental skill instead of a physical one.
If the difficulty of the jump was 3 and my block is 4, I have increased the difficulty for the other character. If he is a top athlete or even has a speed power, then even a weak jump will be enough to succeed. Just because I am not as good at the skill I am attacking him with doesn't mean I can just make him suck.

It's not about making him suck--it's about making him psychologically incapable of jumping, incapable of taking the jump in the first place, not incapable of making it once he does jump.

Doing it the way you suggest basically makes a whole lot of blocks useless, because anyone can break just about any block with their apex skill.

Now if you do this as a maneuver instead, you can easily target the weaker mental skills, since it is an opposed roll. If you succeed, the aspect is yours to work with. You can tag it on the jump roll to increase the difficulty of the jump by 2. You could even negotiate a tag for effect and a compel for the character to simply not jump and let you get away. Or you could go for an attack to take your opponent out of the chase scene.

You could, certainly. I just feel that it makes blocks a lot less useful if they can be easily beaten by any skill, despite it not making sense.

It's the same thing for a veil. The other guy might be attacking randomly, but because he is good or lucky or can throw attacks very fast, he can cover a lot of ground and might still hit you if you are veiled. The best thing you can do when you are veiled and don't want to get hit is to get out of the zone, so you are no longer a viable target. Veiling, in essence, is your defense against being attacked. The roll to find you and attack you is done in one roll with the attack roll. Of course you could do an investigation or alertness maneuver first, to get a feel for where your target is, but it isn't mandatory.

Two things: One, this makes a veil next to useless as a unique block; two, this is directly contradictory to how veils are described in the rulebook. It's a block against perception, and swinging your fists or sword around isn't a perception roll. The rulebook outright says that it's a special type of block that does not directly oppose damage, but lets the caster avoid being attacked entirely.

Looking at Molly's stats vs. the Gruffs at the start of Small Favor, her rote veil, 3 shifts, would be totally pointless played that way--the Gruffs have exactly the same chance of hitting Molly under a veil as they do hitting Molly when she's just standing there in plain sight. Something with a Superb attack rating has a 93 percent chance of hitting Molly when he, theoretically, cannot see her, hear her, smell her, and has no clue where she could be in the immediate area. Does that seem right to you?

[Haru]

It's not about making him suck--it's about making him psychologically incapable of jumping, incapable of taking the jump in the first place, not incapable of making it once he does jump.

A failed athletics roll for a jump can just as easily be not jumping in the last second as it can be failing to jump to the other side.

Doing it the way you suggest basically makes a whole lot of blocks useless, because anyone can break just about any block with their apex skill.

If breaking the block like that makes sense, then yes, you can. But using your apex skill is not always appropriate. Incite something in a social setting, and you can't just use fists to get out of it, without making a scene.

You could, certainly. I just feel that it makes blocks a lot less useful if they can be easily beaten by any skill, despite it not making sense.

Granted, blocks are my least favorite mechanic in the DFRPG. But that aside, I feel that they become way too powerful if you can force someone to do something to overcome it. That's basically a grapple. And I have no problem with modeling something like this as a grapple, but then it should follow the grapple rules and require an appropriate aspect before initiating it.

Another problem I have with your example is that I can't really see it being used in a game like that. If you have a conflict and you block the other character from jumping over to you, then it's basically game over, you won. But that's a taken out result and should be a taken out result in my opinion. You can, as I said, reach that by attacking with incite emotion and taking the other guy out, but not with a block. What you can do is increase the zone border for your opponent. That's a block action right there. But he is still able to jump. He might have lost some of his confidence in his jumping abilities, but those abilities are so awesome, that he can still succeed. If both characters have the same skill level, then the chances are even. If the vampire has a lower skill level, then yes, he has less chance to keep the block up.
Or you have a chase scene that you model as a contest. In a contest, you don't have blocks at all, but I could easily see using incite emotion to get some points and justifying it by saying you temporarily make your opponent afraid of heights.

Two things: One, this makes a veil next to useless as a unique block; two, this is directly contradictory to how veils are described in the rulebook. It's a block against perception, and swinging your fists or sword around isn't a perception roll. The rulebook outright says that it's a special type of block that does not directly oppose damage, but lets the caster avoid being attacked entirely.

Looking at Molly's stats vs. the Gruffs at the start of Small Favor, her rote veil, 3 shifts, would be totally pointless played that way--the Gruffs have exactly the same chance of hitting Molly under a veil as they do hitting Molly when she's just standing there in plain sight. Something with a Superb attack rating has a 93 percent chance of hitting Molly when he, theoretically, cannot see her, hear her, smell her, and has no clue where she could be in the immediate area. Does that seem right to you?

With a veil up, you can easily justify your opponent attacking someone else. Maybe by paying a fate point, maybe just by pointing it out to the GM. Remember that Molly not only used her veil, but she used her Good Deceit skill, too, when she misled the Gruffs into thinking she went somewhere else. She might even have used her Great Discipline to "keep her cool" or something like it.
Then again, looking at OW, the gruffs are not really a threat to Molly. By that writeup, they have Fists at +3 (QW45 but they use the Goblin sheet OW43), which is a match. Now let Molly do an overcharged version of her veil instead of the rote (and since she has to cover her siblings as well, that's likely the case), and she can easily use it to get out of the way. Throw in a Fate point, and you are good to go.

If you are fighting something with a superb skill and your own skills are only at good, then yes, you are going to have a bad time. You can make up for that by being way clever and using your better skills against your opponents worse skills with maneuvers, but a veil does not make you invincible, it is just one way to avoid the worst of being hit. Otherwise a veil with some specialization is an automatic "I win" spell.