# To Defend or Not to Defend?

4 replies to this topic

### #1 LrdVampyre

LrdVampyre

Member

• Members
• 7 posts

Posted 06 June 2012 - 07:43 AM

Here's the question, when you are attacked do you have to make a defense roll?

Here's an example.  Bob is attacking Cerebus who has a base defense of 200.  Bob's base attack we'll say is only 160, so he only needs to get a 40 to hit the Cerebus.  If he rolls under that threshold (does not make the minimum of 200) does that still mean Cerebus needs to roll for defense?

Further clarification: if Cerebus is facing multiple attackers and is going last in the round, if an attack cannot make the base defense does that count as an attack an thereby lower Cerebus's defense or does the multiple defense penalties only kick in if Cerebus actively defends against the attack?

Now, I can see arguments for Cerebus having to make a defensive roll for each attack because of the potential for fumble, but at the same time if you can't hit the base defense is that still counted as a successful attack for defending?

My thought, assuming that you allow the opponent not to have to roll against a 'missed' attack the opponent does not get a chance for a counter-attack.

I know with creatures with Damage Resistance, they roll the dice vs attack and that is their defense (as they have no defense skill) and they suffer no penalty to the roll for multiple attacks.

Careful what you wish for, you just might get it.

Member

• Members
• 93 posts

Posted 06 June 2012 - 10:45 AM

I'm pretty certain I would demand a roll, because:

a) As you said, there's always the possibility of a fumble.

b) If you're defending first, the higher defence you get, the better your counterattack bonus.

c) (and this is more of a personal thing on my part - the other two are more important reasons) You have to actually use a skill for it to be…. well, used.  I know Primaries work slightly differently to Secondaries, but it's only a short, logical step to saying "This guy has 300 in Science, so he doesn't need to bother rolling to invent stuff with an Almost Impossible difficulty." He'd be inventing stuff all over the place, without even bothering to roll.

### #3 F3nr1s

F3nr1s

Member

• Members
• 159 posts

Posted 06 June 2012 - 11:47 AM

I agree with Beadle. If the "defender" doesn't make a defence roll, he hasn't defended at all, so his defence value of 200 wouldn't count. Damage resistance creatures, for example, don't defend themself, so they don't have a defence value. They only have "luck" (the natural D100 roll)

Also: The defender could fumble AND multiple defenses have penatlies (after the second attack, he would have 200-50 (150), he would be under 160 and so on).

And: Maneuver, which are modifing the defence are penalties OR reduction of the defence value ("Absorb Hits" halfs the defence value).

If you want to speed up the fight and know, the "defender" will not counterattack, you could only roll, to the if he fumbles. If not, you need not to calculate the end values.

So long,

### #4 LrdVampyre

LrdVampyre

Member

• Members
• 7 posts

Posted 07 June 2012 - 05:02 PM

thanks.  I was leaning towards needing to have to roll defense if you want to defend, but just wanted to make sure cause of some questions my group came up with during a combat.

Careful what you wish for, you just might get it.

### #5 Jenks

Jenks

Member

• Members
• 26 posts

Posted 08 June 2012 - 10:27 AM

According to the book, the defender has to make a roll. When he is attacked he can do one of 3 things. He can

A) Choose to actively defend. You roll a d100 and add the chosen defense score. However, if the attack is successful, he loses his active actions.

B) He can choose to "Absorb" the attack, under "Absorb Hits. This is very similar to the active defense but he only uses 1/2 his defense score. So he would roll 1d100 and add 1/2 his dodge. In exchange, even if he does get hit by the attack he does not lose his active actions.

C) He can choose "Pure Defense", under the section with the same name. The defender adds +30 to his defense score, but forgoes all active actions in doing so. So he would roll 1d100 and add his dodge+30. But even if the attack hits or misses, he still loses his active actions.

So to answer the OPs question, no matter what the situation, the defender has to make a roll. Even if the opponents attack is below the base defense. Think about it in reverse. Would it be fair if the attacker automatically hit if his attack was higher than the targets base defense? It would be mayhem

You can find info about B and C in the "Special Defenses" section on page 86. Hope that answered the question.

© 2013 Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc. Fantasy Flight Games and the FFG logo are ® of Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc.  All rights reserved.