Using Weapons as defense?

[AstralBlade]

So i picked weapons with the understanding it can defend against other physical attacks, as well being my main attacking skill. But recently, my gm decided to nix that by saying i can ONLY use weapons to defend against other weapons. I can't use it to defend against fangs or claws or even fists. I have to dodge those with athletics. Which i think is pretty unfair. Is this unreasonable? Did I miss something in the rules? Or am i just being that guy who feels treated unfairly because my character is being nerfed?

I'd like to hear some input from the board.

EDIT: Before he nerfed Weapons block for me, i took the Stunt Riposte, which i could use to pretty good effect, but which is now pretty much useless as we fight monsters the majority of the time.

[Hick Jr]

I would say that's a fairly restrictive ruling on Weapons. This is the exact text from the Melee Defense trapping of the Weapons skill in Your Story-

As a combat skill, Weapons inherently carries the ability to defend yourself in a fight against other Weapons and Fists attacks, so long as you have a weapon in hand. (You still need Athletics to make yourself a difficult target against ranged fire from Guns.)

So you can use Weapons to defend against Fists and Weapons, if you're going by the book.

[GryMor]

And natural weapons are almost always enhancements to Fists attacks.

[Sanctaphrax]

Yeah, your GM is clearly off-base here.

[FaerieGodfather]

Saying you can't block bullets and spells with Weapons is a perfectly reasonable ruling, and one that I apply. Saying that you can't block claws and fists with it is absolutely ridiculous-- it doesn't make a lick of sense.

[wyvern]

One: saying you can't use Weapons to defend against fangs/claws/fists is a clear houserule (and one I wouldn't want to play with.)

Two: If your gaming group insists on it (remember: FATE's rule zero isn't "The GM is right" - the other players should definitely get a say here), then it would be entirely fair for you to be allowed to retcon your character - perhaps removing the riposte stunt, perhaps even re-building to use Fists skill instead of Weapons.  (I use "retcon" deliberately - this isn't an in character change, it's an out-of-character response to a rules change; if you do this, then whatever you end up with is, in character, how he's always been.)

Three: You also deserve an explanation of why your GM made that change.  If, for example, it's because your character was totally dominating fight scenes and the other players weren't having fun, then you should work with your gaming group to fix that.  If it's just that your character was effective enough that the GM wasn't having fun... well, you should still find a way to fix that, but him arbitrarily nerfing your character isn't the right way.  Instead, you should look for ways to work with him; perhaps by finding self-compels like "Well, this showdown is in a museum - I doubt the mundane security will let me walk in with a sword..."

[fantazero]

So i picked weapons with the understanding it can defend against other physical attacks, as well being my main attacking skill. But recently, my gm decided to nix that by saying i can ONLY use weapons to defend against other weapons. I can't use it to defend against fangs or claws or even fists. I have to dodge those with athletics. Which i think is pretty unfair. Is this unreasonable? Did I miss something in the rules? Or am i just being that guy who feels treated unfairly because my character is being nerfed?

I'd like to hear some input from the board.

EDIT: Before he nerfed Weapons block for me, i took the Stunt Riposte, which i could use to pretty good effect, but which is now pretty much useless as we fight monsters the majority of the time.

Take a stunt, or better yet, get a new GM.

[Cadd]

One: saying you can't use Weapons to defend against fangs/claws/fists is a clear houserule (and one I wouldn't want to play with.)

Two: If your gaming group insists on it (remember: FATE's rule zero isn't "The GM is right" - the other players should definitely get a say here), then it would be entirely fair for you to be allowed to retcon your character - perhaps removing the riposte stunt, perhaps even re-building to use Fists skill instead of Weapons.  (I use "retcon" deliberately - this isn't an in character change, it's an out-of-character response to a rules change; if you do this, then whatever you end up with is, in character, how he's always been.)

Three: You also deserve an explanation of why your GM made that change.  If, for example, it's because your character was totally dominating fight scenes and the other players weren't having fun, then you should work with your gaming group to fix that.  If it's just that your character was effective enough that the GM wasn't having fun... well, you should still find a way to fix that, but him arbitrarily nerfing your character isn't the right way.  Instead, you should look for ways to work with him; perhaps by finding self-compels like "Well, this showdown is in a museum - I doubt the mundane security will let me walk in with a sword..."

These points are all exactly my sentiments, but most of all point 3 - even if I wasn't familiar with the rules, I'd as "why?" for something like that. And with that I would ask for any kind of argument for disallowing weapons-defense, because I can't see any! Neither logic nor balance points that way for me.

If someone proposes a house rule, always ask what the rule is meant to accomplish. If it's something that changes RAW rather than adding to it, ask what is the problem with RAW? Sometimes there are definitely things in RAW worth modifying, other things just feel better for a specific game, but there should always be a clear reason.

[UmbraLux]

I agree with most of the comments here - in general, melee attacks should be something which can be parried by a weapon.  But since the OP didn't mention specifics, it is worth mentioning that using Weapons for defense against melee isn't always appropriate.  Immaterial beings are the obvious exception, you can't parry what you can't touch.  Depending on the situation, you may also have an issue with entities immune to the weapon or material used.

This is why so much is left up to the individual group. 

[Bedurndurn]

That's mighty stupid; enough so that I don't even see that being a thing that reasonable people could disagree on.

Possible solutions (aside from the obvious "Don't let that guy run a game. He really doesn't get it."):

1. Stunt your weapon attack onto Athletics. (Recommended stunt name: 'Pretty, Pretty Sword Dancing!'). Your Athletics can now do everything important that Weapons can do (except throw knives at people because that's a separate trapping) and you can dodge everything including guns, spells, bees, etc.

2. Say, 'Fine' and make a new character that is a wizard. Take Channeling [something], 1 point of refinement for more focus items and spend your focus item slots on +4 Offensive Control [something]. You have now won the combat minigame of DFRPG.

[fantazero]

If someone proposes a house rule, always ask what the rule is meant to accomplish.

This, A thousand times this