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.