Evocation Blocks: Too Weak?

[JDK002]

If you do not put up a block, you are the target of the attack. If you do put up the block, you are not the target of the attack. That sorta seems like doing something to me.
It's a turn where nobody on the other side is attacking what's likely the group's strongest attacker--the enemy wizard is spending stress and potentially backlash to attack someone who is, in all likelihood, better equipped to dodge or deal with his attack than the wizard would be unprotected.
And the rest of the group are such defenseless lambs that it's preferable if the wizard gets ganked instead?
If you're not getting hit, then by default, you're ahead of the game. The other side is going to be spending effort and resources while you don't.

And you're right. A smart GM wouldn't attack the guy behind the nigh-invincible barrier. He would have his side maneuver and support one another to get through that barrier--which still results in fewer successful attacks against the wizard's side.

So putting up a shield around the wizard results in either A. the wizard taking a breather while the other side spends stress, effort, and resources attacking everyone else, allowing him to use his own stress and resources when everyone else is already getting tired; or B. the other side focuses on the wizard's shield with maneuvers, in which case they're not attacking the wizard's team and may not even get through the shield.

Or C: The other team totally ignores the wizard while he's sitting there doing nothing behind a shield, his team mates get beaten down because now they are down one action per exchange, and now the wizard is horribly out-numbered.  Blocks have zero utility, that's the real crux of the problem.  Combine that with the fact that you have to telegraph your defense when you put one up.  The idea of defense is to lessen the effect of the oppositions actions against you.  In a game like this where action economy is paramount, letting the other side have the full effect of their actions while your side is down an action is not optimal in a straight forward fight.

[Mr. Death]

You seem to be under the assumption that the wizard is only erecting the barrier with a complete and utter lack of understanding of any kind of tactics at all. Yes, this is bad. But that's because the player is not using his resources well, not because evocation blocks are badly implemented.

So yes, is it bad if the wizard just sits under his barrier the whole fight and does nothing else? Yes. But that's not a weakness of the evocation block, it's a weakness of the player who's using his resources in a dopey way. There are plenty of situations where a blocking spell does a ton of good.

You might as well be saying that guns are underpowered because a player might decide to empty his clip into a potted plant instead. You're talking about the failings of a player who doesn't know what he's doing, not the failing of the game mechanic.

There's also the issue of the GM playing like a twink instead of playing the enemies in character. A Red Court Vampire doesn't go, "Hm, Dresden's under a 5-shift block, so I should go around him and attack Murphy." A Red Court Vampire thinks, "There's Dresden! Get him!"

[Aminar]

Exactly.  Now I can say that if You're stalling a chokepoint while the party handles another force then sure.  If you can defend a portion of the party then sure.  But Blocks are not effecive strategy in a straight fight.  And they don't work like Harry uses them.  He pops one up just before the attack hits, and then attacks from behind it, throwing extra will to strengthen it when its needed.  He uses them as a reactive defense.  Blocks don't work like that in this RPG.

And no.  A Red Court Vampire thinks like a predator.  The Wizard is powerful.  I should kill the weak one first and then hit the wizard when he is weakened by holding up that silly shield.  I believe Jim has mentioned predator mindset more than once.  The enemy wizard will be more than smart enough to see, Hmmm.  I could break that shield or I could break that mortal with the gun then deal with Dresden.

What we're saying is that Blocks are not strategically viable in regular circumstances.  They are incredibly situational. 

[Mr. Death]

Exactly.  Now I can say that if You're stalling a chokepoint while the party handles another force then sure.  If you can defend a portion of the party then sure.  But Blocks are not effecive strategy in a straight fight.  And they don't work like Harry uses them.  He pops one up just before the attack hits, and then attacks from behind it, throwing extra will to strengthen it when its needed.  He uses them as a reactive defense.  Blocks don't work like that in this RPG.

They do if you are holding action and interrupt, or make a declaration that you're preparing it. Remember the rules are an abstract. Harry holds his action until the vampire attacks, then he tosses up the shield. The vampire attacks it, then it's Harry's turn again.

And no.  A Red Court Vampire thinks like a predator.  The Wizard is powerful.  I should kill the weak one first and then hit the wizard when he is weakened by holding up that silly shield.

Okay, then explain why they act exactly like how I described every time they run into Dresden, such as in Changes, where they jump straight at him.

I believe Jim has mentioned predator mindset more than once.  The enemy wizard will be more than smart enough to see, Hmmm.  I could break that shield or I could break that mortal with the gun then deal with Dresden.

The average mook isn't going to be that smart that they can calculate like that in a fight. You're giving them too much credit.

What we're saying is that Blocks are not strategically viable in regular circumstances.  They are incredibly situational.

Everything is situational. Blocks have plenty of use--as a GM, I've seen battles won and lost on the strength of blocks.

[Haru]

The biggest problem with evocation blocks, that I have found, is the fact that they only last for one exchange, whether they are useful or not. In my game, we have decided to accommodate this by letting blocks hold indefinitely, but you will get a -2 on any action you want to perform while holding up the spell. That way, you can put up a shield at the start of the conflict and then go about your day, until it is broken.

Though I have to say I like the fate core approach a bit better, where a shield spell is simply an aspect that grants you the power to defend physical attacks with discipline. That way, you can bump your defense with tags and invokes, so you are not limited to the static evocation block. The aspect will not expire after one exchange as well, so it takes care of that problem, and it is all around a great solution.

[Vargo Teras]

I never threw up a single-person defensive block while playing a caster, but I got a whole lot of mileage out of them nonetheless.  Zone-wide blocks against movement by swamping my foes in rushing water, blocks on an enemy spellcaster by scouring away any magic he tried to call up, blocks against perception by bringing up mists, and that's all with one element. A true evoker has a tremendous range of ways he can interfere with the enemy's ability to hit his buddies as well as him.

And the solution to the short duration is, unless I'm badly misremembering, very simple. You call up your big one-exchange spell on the first round, then extend its duration on the second round. Yes, it eats up time, but extending that ten-shift encased-in-ice spell for another six exchanges is worth a second round of action, assuming you've got a team that's helping you out. And if you don't, then you should be extending whatever spell you're using to get the hell out of there.

[GryMor]

Evocation blocks are fine (especially offensive, an quagmire effects can be really good at setting up an area hammer down), but you may want to note that, for mechanical reasons, enchanted items are much more effective at generating blocks and maneuver stacks than they are at creating attacks. For opportunity cost reasons, this means it's generally better to have offensive foci and not use free form defensive blocks, relying on enchanted items to cover one or two sorts of blocks. This seems to match up with the books, so it's probably not entirely accidental.

[Lavecki121]

Let's take a sample battle here.

4 v 4. 1 Wizard, 1 WC Vampire, 1 Vanilla Mortal, 1 Werewolf.
Team 1 Wizard puts up a powerful block defending himself.
Team 2 Wizard Aims a powerful spell at Team 1's Vanilla Mortal.
Team 1 is down a person.
Team 1 WCV attacks Team 2 Wizard and takes him out.
Team 2 WCV and Team 2 Vanilla Mortal Team up on Team 1 Wizard and deal with him before he can manage another spell  because WCV's own Wizards because the block doesn't defend against mental attacks.
Team 1 and Team 2 Werewolves handle eachother.
End of Round 1, Team 1 has 1 Shapeshifter and 1 WCV verse a Vanilla Mortal, a WCV and a shapeshifter.  Who wins?
Hint, the team that didn't mess around with a block.
Next Scenario.
Instead of a global Block Wizard 1 Blocks off Wizard 2 from doing anything but leaves himself open.  It's a net Zero result. 
Wizards are better served being blasty cannons than making evocation blocks because they have the highest accuracy and the most damage.  Sacrificing even 1 turn of that can doom the party.

As for the uninvested shield.  That's her fault for not spending the time to make it worthwhile.  a 1 slot enchanted item isn't super reliable for defense purposes.

Im going to use this to explain why blocks can be effective. Also you are going on the assumption that the wizard goes first. For my illistration I am taking out the shapeshifters because, in your example, they took each other out so i will leave them be.

1VM attacks 2Wiz with a pistol dealing whatever damage. 2VM attacks 1WCV. 1Wiz Blocks 1VM from damage. 2Wiz attacks 1VM and has a block to deal with. blah blah blah. It matters how people respond too. As a GM im not having the wizard who just got attacked ignore that fact and attack someone who is not activly dealing him damage. I also am not going to have a person who says "attack that guy!" and then have them change that strategy because a block got put up.

Narativly me putting up a block could be construed as a block comming up at the last second. I just have to make the roll beforehand.

When dresden puts up a block he his making his roll before he puts the block up, not when it happens, the person attacking is just met with the block that dresden prepared earlier.

[Mr. Death]

As a GM im not having the wizard who just got attacked ignore that fact and attack someone who is not activly dealing him damage. I also am not going to have a person who says "attack that guy!" and then have them change that strategy because a block got put up.

This, definitely. Neither side of the conflict is, or should be played as, a single entity all under the direct and omniscient control of a being seeking to exploit every vulnerability the instant it comes in. Both sides of the conflict are filled with individuals who are going to be motivated by things other than a calculation of relative skill rolls and block strength.

So yes, a vampire is going to run smack into a wall of force to try and attack the person behind it. Someone is going to attack the wizard even if he puts up a shield, because the wizard is a major target on his own, whatever else happens.

[Deadmanwalking]

People seem to be missing about three things:

1. You can defend more than one person with an Evocation Block. Heck, do it right and you can defend the whole party. Look at the duel in White Night where Harry and Carlos take turns defending the both of them while the other does offense.

2. Wizards are death incarnate on offense, at least potentially, anyone with brains is gonna try to take them out, block or no. If they don't, they can easily get fried en masse. Turn 1: Block. Nobody attacks? Turn 2: Zone Attack with a couple of Declarations piled on it. Dead enemies. This isn't always what happens, but it can happen and anyone who faces Wizards knows it.

3. This is what Enchanted Items are for. They don't take an action and thus play a big part in being an effective spellcaster defensively.

[Sanctaphrax]

2. Wizards are death incarnate on offense, at least potentially, anyone with brains is gonna try to take them out, block or no. If they don't, they can easily get fried en masse. Turn 1: Block. Nobody attacks? Turn 2: Zone Attack with a couple of Declarations piled on it. Dead enemies. This isn't always what happens, but it can happen and anyone who faces Wizards knows it.

If you could kill everything with one spell, why didn't you cast that spell first?

And if your block is strong enough, attacking you is evidence of stupidity. Not intelligence. Doesn't matter how valuable hitting the wizard would be if hitting him is mathematically impossible.

I'm with you on the first point though, and I'd be with you on the third if I thought Crafting counted as Evocation. Occasionally, evocation blocks are really handy. But only occasionally.

[InFerrumVeritas]

Blocking yourself is often a tactical mistake.  But blocks aren't. 

A block preventing the massively strong grendelkin from attacking anyone is effective.
A block keeping the Malks from moving into your zone lets your group pick them off with guns.
A block keeping the enemy spell caster from launching the zone wide fireball is good.

Granted, I allow a house rule to let evocation blocks be cast as a defensive action.

[Deadmanwalking]

If you could kill everything with one spell, why didn't you cast that spell first?

An extra turn of Declarations, possibly allowing your comrades to set the poor bastards up with Maneuvers. Alternately, fear that some will survive and attack you. A more common pattern would be three rounds (1: Set up block, 2: Extend Block, 3. Fry enemies), for safety's sake...but the point is that ignoring the Wizard is not a way to live long.

And if your block is strong enough, attacking you is evidence of stupidity. Not intelligence. Doesn't matter how valuable hitting the wizard would be if hitting him is mathematically impossible.

Totally true after the first attack...but unless they have a lot of Lore (or something else appropriate), a 4 shift Block and a 10 shift block look about the same. Add in the whole 'Wizards are really dangerous' factor noted above, and not at least probing their defenses is not the brightest move. Or serious metagaming.

I'm with you on the first point though, and I'd be with you on the third if I thought Crafting counted as Evocation.

Point. 

Just noting what Wizards have in the way of defensive options.

Occasionally, evocation blocks are really handy. But only occasionally.

Depends on what else you have available defensively. If you have a good Enchanted Item defense, then yeah, it's gonna be a corner case...if you don't it might be a better idea a lot more of the time.

Blocking yourself is often a tactical mistake.  But blocks aren't. 

A block preventing the massively strong grendelkin from attacking anyone is effective.
A block keeping the Malks from moving into your zone lets your group pick them off with guns.
A block keeping the enemy spell caster from launching the zone wide fireball is good.

This is also true.

[Auspice]

I really don't see how they're underpowered. Really, few antagonists that aren't named major NPCs should be attacking from more than 3, so a 4-shift block on its own is pretty effective against most things. If a caster is equipped properly, they should be able to pull off 8-10 shift shields fairly easily.

I agree, they are absolutely NOT underpowered.  Many wizards will have a 4 or 5 in Conviction.  Many also have a shield bracelet (or an equivalent) that would give a +1.  Finally, many wizards spent an enchanted item slot for something like Harry's Duster.  Now let me show you how this would play out...

Harry enters a room to find there are guys with guns.  He instantly puts up his bracelet with a 6 Power (5 for strength, 1 for 1 extra exchange).  Until his next turn, every enemy has to get a 5 to hit him.  Keep in mind that 5 is something that is so good, many campaigns don't allow a skill that high.  A thug would have maybe a 2 or 3 at guns.  A trained cop would probably have a 4.  Only the best would have higher.  All this is for one mental stress.  Even if one gets through, you can use your duster as armor.  Your block would cancel out most of the attack, and most weapons are 2 or 3, so the duster would stop most or all of it.

Before I continue, compare having to roll Athletics.  Yes, you might get an awesome roll but you are just as likely to get a -2 as you are +2 and how screwed would you be?

Next turn you decide to spend one more casting action to up the duration.  Because you have the shield bracelet you can get it for 6 more exchanges.  Now you've taken your second stress.  (If you had spend an additional stress to make it even higher in the beginning, it would be nearly indestructible.)

Now you have the freedom to move as you please.  You can even turn it into an Armor of 2 if you think your block might get canceled (though it then won't stack with your duster).  With 6 more exchanges, you have options while they poo themselves because their bullets can't hurt you.

Here's the final kicker... you can use that stored shield energy for another spell.  (The rules are on p.260)  As long as there is one exchange left it is never a complete waste.

This isn't even including your ability to protect EVERYBODY.  I think it's one more power required to protect a person next to you or 2 for a zone.  In a group fight, you can put up an area block, saving everybody, then they can attack without fear.  If it counts as armor, they can even dodge while getting your bonus.

The final factor you need to consider is how incredibly overpowered wizards are.  (Which is ok.  I don't mind, my players don't mind)  Evocation gives you this boost to your defense that you wouldn't already have.  It also gives you an incredibly powerful damaging attack.  How many of the other players will have a Weapon Strength: 5 (or higher) attack?  Fine, it costs stress that goes away pretty quickly.  If you have a 5 in Conviction you'll even have an additional mild mental consequence.

If you throw out Evocation like a thug then, yes, it can be underpowered.  Maybe you're facing that creature that is incredibly resistant to magic and is coming towards you to crush everything.  Boost that Fuego up and attack the wooden floor, making the creature fall to the lower floor.  You can't really do that with gun or sword.

Maybe the entire room is filled with vampires.  Heck with it, make it a zone attack and burn EVERYTHING.  Conviction:5 means 5 damage to everybody in the room if they don't get a 6 on their dodge.  (More damage if they get anything less than a 5.)  That only costs ONE STRESS.

[Auspice]

If you could kill everything with one spell, why didn't you cast that spell first?

Maybe your enemies are mortals and you're worried about the First Law.  Maybe they have hostages or bystanders.

A good GM will also make certain people react differently instead of just mechanically.  In my games, if a man walks in when people try to gun him down, holds up his hand, and bullets do nothing, they are more willing to talk.  That's exactly how it's worked a few times with Marcone.