Yet another Feint question...

[Kromm]

Blocking spells aren't active defense rolls; they're spells that generate an effect equivalent to a successful active defense if they're cast successfully. They take literally no time, so they're faster than any feint or attack, and they don't require the user to know a damned thing about combat. As such, they're unaffected by the modifiers that apply to active defenses (Combat Reflexes, Deceptive Attack, Feint, flanking, footing, posture, Telegraphic Attack, etc.). Instead, they're affected by the modifiers that apply to spells (mana level, shock, spells "on," etc.). The GM who dislikes that is welcome to rule otherwise . . . but there will doubtless be places where that doesn't make much sense, and I can't help you there.

Believe me, if we had meant for Blocking spells to be active defense rolls, we'd have said so, allowed them to resist Feint at full skill, and made the actual defense a roll against Iron Arm/2 + 3 or whatever.

[Figleaf23]

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

Not seeing the conflict between saying "they could have been optional rules" and saying "they could be optional rules".

No conflict in result.

For my own info, I'm just trying to understand the reasoning TKD expressed.