Why does +1 Defense Bonus cost less than +1 Block?

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by sjmdw45

GM: it's a random hit location, so [rolls] the scimitar hits your right hand. [starts to roll damage]

Bob: oh, my hand?! My right hand has an extra Deflect +4 on it, so the parry is successful after all.

GM: lucky for you. Here comes the next peshkali scimitar... [rolls]

IME, many players would expect the GM to catch this.

At any rate, I would qualify this as an annoying exception to the normal game mechanics.

[zoncxs]

Originally Posted by sjmdw45

You misunderstand.

GM: the peshkali tries to slice off part of your anatomy. [rolls] Thunk! 11 hits.

Bob: wait, maybe I can parry it! [rolls] 15. I fail.

GM: it's a random hit location, so [rolls] the scimitar hits your right hand. [starts to roll damage]

Bob: oh, my hand?! My right hand has an extra Deflect +4 on it, so the parry is successful after all.

GM: lucky for you. Here comes the next peshkali scimitar... [rolls]

This line of events is flawed.

Once the roll to hit succeeds, you then roll random hit location, not after the player rolls to defend. So:

GM: the peshkali tries to slice off part of your anatomy. [rolls] Thunk! 11 hits.

GM: it's a random hit location, so [rolls] the scimitar hits your right hand.

Bob: oh, my hand?! My right hand has an extra Deflect +4 on it, so [rolls] the parry is successful.

GM: lucky for you. Here comes the next peshkali scimitar... [rolls]


EDIT:: apparently I am wrong! Basic page 400 says to roll location after the foe fails to defend.

[Mr_Sandman]

I understand using the per-piece pricing rule for armor with fortify and lighten enchantments. I think it doesn't fit as well for deflect. Despite RAW, I'd probably rule against it working that way, just to keep things simpler and more rational (to me anyway). I find it hard to envision how deflect is meant to work on a piecemeal basis, improving a character's dodge, parry and block, but just for attacks that would hit one particular body part? My house rule would be always pay full price for deflect, whether it is on one piece or the whole suit, and it works for the whole body.

[ehrbar]

Originally Posted by Mr_Sandman

I understand using the per-piece pricing rule for armor with fortify and lighten enchantments. I think it doesn't fit as well for deflect. Despite RAW, I'd probably rule against it working that way, just to keep things simpler and more rational (to me anyway).

Yeah, that was the motive behind why my Deflect rewrite (mentioned above, linked in my signature) also says "This cost is not reduced for individual pieces of armor."

[sjmdw45]

Originally Posted by zoncxs

This line of events is flawed.

Once the roll to hit succeeds, you then roll random hit location, not after the player rolls to defend. So:

...

EDIT:: apparently I am wrong! Basic page 400 says to roll location after the foe fails to defend.

The larger point here is that the order you roll in doesn't matter as long as you wind up with the same results as the "official" order. It's perfectly valid to do this:

GM: The peshkali attacks you! [roll, roll, roll, roll, roll, roll] What do you do?

Bob: I am going to parry the first two and then try to dodge the others. No retreat.

GM: There are three hits and then a crit.

Bob: [roll, roll, roll] Ouch, four hits total. I'm probably dead meat.

You won't do this every time--if the GM intends the peshkali to chop off Bob's leg in order to make subsequent hits easier, he won't do them in parallel like this. But if your goal is just to make your life easier as a GM, you can.

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by zoncxs

Once the roll to hit succeeds, you then roll random hit location, not after the player rolls to defend.

Doing it this way is the first degree of annoyingness I sited. Rolling things that don't actually matter is not good.