» Fri Jun 08, 2012 3:39 pm
I'm fine with it too, but since I started out so sarcastically dismissing the OP at the beginning of the thread before I grasped his exact point, let me play devil's advocate for a minute and argue his side of the question.
It's correct that an execution, whether by the player or by an NPC, only triggers when the attack will do enough damage to kill the person outright anyway. That much is correct. But the idea is that it's only supposed to be an animation triggered by that fact, and not for it to actually have an effect on anything besides displaying that animation under the right conditions. However, if the execution has the ability to disable blocking that would have stopped that killing blow then the execution has changed from merely being a visual effect triggered under certain conditions to something that actually alters the outcome of fights. I doubt that was the original intention when they came up with the idea for the execution animations.
Now, as somebody else said, blocking doesn't completely mitigate 100% of damage, but it does do quite a bit. If the incoming blow was going to do enough damage to kill the player even while blocking, then I can consider the execution perfectly justified. And even if the block would have stopped the blow short of killing the player, allowing him to get in his own final shot at a weakened enemy, I can still accept it as a bit of bad luck, and not a bad game mechanic. But I certainly do have to admit I'd find it quite frustrating if I were in a close fight, had judged the rhythym of the fight well, was waiting to block a blow, and was prevented from blocking because of bad luck triggering the execution animation. Sure, there's logic in that bad luck - but I certainly can't dismiss the complaint as trivial like I did initially.