Ok, I'm not a huge fan of having two separate defenses. I have several reasons:

1) Aesthetics-watch any JRPG or anime, and the characters block and dodge all the time. They don't only rely on one (or rather, if they do, that character is more of an oddity than the rest).

2) Reality-when you are taught to fight, you are not only taught to block or dodge. You are taught to defend yourself. I've not studied a lot of martial arts, but I have studied some, and this was always the case.

3) Mechanics-Block seems, in all cases, mathematically (far, far) worse than dodging. Your negatives are higher. Your weapon can be broken. The only benefits are that shields add more, you can use item quality bonuses and it relies on Dex. You even need a Ki ability to defend yourself from magic, while a dodge does it automatically.

So... that being the case, I see little reason to keep the two aspects separate. I'd like to roll them into a single 'Defense' ability. It would key off Agil and probably use the Dodge modifiers. Item bonuses would add in full (I think). This is, I think, basically how the Fan project for Anima Beyond Sci-Fi does it.

Has anyone tried a similar Houserule? Any issues with it? Did you notice any effect at all?

Please don't try to argue that I shouldn't do this, unless you have some first hand experience that indicates the game will break. If you like it the way it is, that's cool. Do a different thread about that.

I don't know what JRPG's you play, but most rpg's I see are characters taking full on shots to inflated hp pools while occasionally dodging. And the main benefit of block is that you don't need to be able to move to stop area attacks.

As to your rule, it shouldn't be a huge problem.

Tywyll said:

3) Mechanics-Block seems, in all cases, mathematically (far, far) worse than dodging. Your negatives are higher. Your weapon can be broken. The only benefits are that shields add more, you can use item quality bonuses and it relies on Dex. You even need a Ki ability to defend yourself from magic, while a dodge does it automatically.

I understand your reasoning and it does make sense at first glance, however there are a few points I would like to make:

1) It is always better to Dodge if you can . This is important, a character can only move 1/4th their max speed as a passive action. Therefore if an area of effect has a radius greater than 1/4th their move speed they can not dodge at all. Their defense is a 0. This is the only case dodge is worse than block, and actually happens a lot in closed spaces (houses/dungeons/etc.).
2) Because Dodge is almost always better than Block why choose block? Because your DEX is a lot higher than AGI, and your increasing your DEX as you level. Forcing a Fighter to need one stat to defend and one to attack is a large disadvantage. Plus giving a shield bonus with the dodge penalties does not make any sense.
3) Mages and Psychics can get Dodge 1 for 2DP, but not block. A lot of other classes have this, for these would "defense" cost 2 or 3?

Now to get to my point: I don't like this idea. I have learned, not from this specifically, but from completely removing other mechanics, that doing so is a bad idea. Completely removing any base mechanic in a system (especially as complex as this system) often gets one in more trouble than it seems at first. However, if you do not like the current system, you definitely should change it. So I propose a different way to change it than removing the difference between dodge and block entirely.

A) The current penalty for using the defense you are untrained in is -80. Basically you take 80% more damage if you try it the other way. This is a bit high so cut it in half: -40 for 40%.
B) Create a Style Module that allows you to use your untrained defense at half penalty, make it cost 20~30DP, so you normally defend at -80, and at -40 with the module.
C) Combine both. Normally take a -40 untrained and take a -20 if you take a Style Module. As that these penalties are noticeable, but not in any way crippling, this is my favorite.

Lia Valenth said:

This is just flat out untrue per page 93 of the core rulebook. If you can't move out of the radius of an area of effect, you take - 80 to your dodge. This applies even in situations when your movement is restricted(if the room is only 20*20 with an area attack of 500 feet radius). Of course since anybody who has one of the defense skills can attempt the other at a -60 penalty, so if you think an area attack is coming that you can't move out of, you can try to block it at a -60(plus whatever weapon bonus) instead of dodging.

Your right...interesting. Well that does make dodge better at just about everything doesn't it...that doesn't seem right.

It seems no one remembers that Block allows you to cover others. Although it's not an exceptional maneuver per se, it can be gratly improved getting the Guardian Magnus (for mere 40DP and 10MK, 50Notice Required). If you're the party tank you DEFINITELY have to go for block.

Other good reasons for using Block instead of Dodge? Well, as already said, you might not want to put high points BOTH on Dexterity AND Agility, or your class being Warrior or Weapon Master only gets +5 bonus per level to Block, instead of Dodge, meaning by level 10 you're renouncing to a full +50 Defense if you're going for Dodge instead of Block. Shields let a character Block distance attack as if he were dodging AND they give better bonus to Block than Dodge. Any Quality/Magic Weapon gives bonus to Block but not Dodge. Finally, even without considering shield/quality bonus, once you have Block Mastery, you only get -20 against SHOT projectiles (no penalties against thrown ones), but again you will be able to cover for others, which IS a big deal of difference in a party logic.

I'm not sure, but afaik characters can Dodge others into a safe place as well. It's called "Push Somebody Aside" or some like that. If you fail you tanke the damage instead the person to be rescued/as well.

But I don't have the books right here.

~ Sofia Corba

Yep, you are right. I missed that entirely.

Anyway, a character with a shield (or a two handed weapon and the appropriate module) can defend from attacks by blocking exactly like a dodging character AND benefit from shield/quality bonuses.

The choice between block and dodge is pretty easy actually: unless you have a good reason to choose block (not enough 10s to put it both on dexterity and agility, class bonus to block, use of shield or good artifact weapon), you choose dodge. It's as simple as that.

There's no doubt that for low-level characters Dodge is better, but on the long run (after achieving mastery in particular), the difference tends to be much less significative.

So yes, there are a lot of reasons it could be a bad idea in theory, especially for defense minded classes. Then there is a lot of questions of how to handle classes that have bonuses in one but not the other.

But, as I suggested before, decreasing the penalty for using the other untrained is probably a lot easier and more balanced than merging the two. Even if you removed the penalty to use the untrained one, but kept them separate, it would prevent things from getting out of hand, because then the character could choose to take the penalties/bonuses for whichever is better at the moment, while not combining them into one over powered defense.

Well, I think it goes without saying that if I dispensed with Block AND Dodge, then there would no longer be a distinction for classes that currently have one. In other words, if a class gets a +5 per level to either, they would now get it to Defence. The DP cost would be normalized for everyone, using your best current cost.

Dodge and Block vs AoE. This sounds like a toggle switch-either the game favors one or the other based on whether you can block energy. So, there is a slight cost of MK to become superior to dodging. Which, again, makes the system sound unbalanced and the distinction ultimately seem unnecessary.

Increasing both Dex & Agil. There are martial characters that already favour Agil for defence. Any of the classes that already favour that defence are at a disadvantage currently (as stats go), so this change seems like it equalizes things for everyone making it more fair rather than less. The alternative, I suppose, is to do away with Agil entirely, rolling it entirely into Dex, but that makes Dex a bit of a God Stat.

Allowing full item benefits might be a tad much if using the Dodge penalties. As such, I’d probably use the Dodge benefits (+5/10/15 for shields and maybe half the bonus of items).

As for Mastery being a ‘balancing factor’… that’s a looooonnnnggggg way off for the campaign I’m running, if anyone ever makes it. I don’t see it happening for 5 or 6 levels at least (2 Technicians and a Tao). And if the system corrects itself (or has a widget you buy to correct it) at high levels, that seems like a design flaw rather than a feature.

As to the JRPG’s I’ve been playing, fair enough, the game icons may not do a whole lot of dodging or blocking, but the cut scenes sure as hell do, and I play Anima because I want a game that provides this kind of experience:

The thing is that even with separate block and dodge defenses mechanically, those only effect the penalties to different attacks, fluffwise a role for block can be a full parry, slight sidestep while guiding their blade or even a duck under and rising up after the attack has passed. Every single attack in that video could, from a mechanic point of view, could be just blocks They could also all be dodges depending on your character's preferences and what penalties you want. This is also why the Anima book does not recommend fortitude and breakage on every hit, because not every hit has to fluffwise be a shot that even hits your sword.

There is still a level of abstraction, just as an attack can actually be a series of 3 separate attacks in the game, while being a single mechanical hit in world of your Anima campaign(this is actually an example directly from the Anima combat chapter and remarkably the D&D 3.x players handbook). This problem with the abstraction is what leads to silly rules like feint house rules for anima(or other unnamed games), people think that if it isn't happening mechanically it isn't happening in game. I can tell you right now, that people are already assumed to be feinting in Anima, it is such an inherent part of combat that it is already happening. It just doesn't need to be represented mechanically.

Kalis said:

Could you please telll me on which page this is mentioned? It seems that i've overread this all the time. And since my character tends to block all the time and she doesn't have Presence Extrusion + Aura Extension (yet), there's always the danger of destroying my shield and weapon.

We don't fight often in our group. I'm like 4th level (nearly 5th level) and I fought like 5 times (don't include getting knocked out by magic - **** why does this can't be stopped by my shield yet ). So we haven't used the breakage-rules often. It was once used for flavor when a slayer threw stones and i blocked them. First it broke my shield, then my arms. Luckily we were retreading and my healing is very good so i wasn't out of game that long.

Regarding the "Merging" you shouldn't forget, that this kind of weakens the characters who can buy both defenses for only 2 DP or gets level bonuses for both. If you give all the classes the cheaper bonus you benefit those classes who have one expensive defense and/or not both bonuses. I don't know how i would deal with this, but as a warrior for example i would feel at a disadvantage.
Sure no warrior spends DP in both defenses, but he has the opportunity doing so.

Maybe you could give the classes with both bonuses some sort of benefit. Like raising the Max-bonus from 50 to 60 or something like that. But that's only a thought. I haven't testet or calculated it. So I don't know if something like that is necessary at all. It's just that a class who have both defenses cheap and /or both class bonuses has worse stats in other situations. After all each advantage does cost some sort of generation points.

~ Sofia Corba

Sofia Corba said:

Bottom of page 86 says that it is recommended that GM's not overuse the breakage and fortitude rules except in special circumstances.