Question about Aspects placed using maneuvers.

[ema nymton]

If a maneuver is used to create an aspect it only impacts on play if a fate point is spent (beyond the initial tag) correct? So to use an example from the book if I take cover I am actually no harder to hit unless unless I spend a fate point?

I Like the fate system but this seems a bit odd and I can see some really odd situations developing, like blinded characters fighting normally until someone spends a fate point.

Have I misunderstood or is this how they system works?

[luminos]

Well, yes and no.  For many maneuvers, there is no solid mechanical benefit beyond the tag/invoke/compel uses, but often the maneuvers have a side benefit.  The person who got disarmed is still disarmed for the length of the maneuver, so he can't use the weapon he just lost until the maneuver is gone.  A sticky called shot maneuver still lets your character justify attacking one specific location, even if there is no mechanical benefit in doing so (red court unarmored belly *cough* *cough*).  Other various maneuvers might have some other narratively derived benefit.  The point is that even when the tag is gone, the player with a maneuver stuck on him still has to play his situation with that maneuver in mind.

Having a character blinded might give you just the excuse you need to enter stealth for an ambush even though combat has already started. 

Taking cover as a maneuver seems to be the kind of thing that is only meant for a short term benefit, but there might be some advantage you can still get from it.  For that particular example though, if you really want to represent taking cover it would be better to make a full defense action.

[Kordeth]

If a maneuver is used to create an aspect it only impacts on play if a fate point is spent (beyond the initial tag) correct? So to use an example from the book if I take cover I am actually no harder to hit unless unless I spend a fate point?

As luminos said, there are other factors to consider, but bear in mind that to a large extent this is by design. FATE is designed to encourage fast-paced action full of cool stunts and neat tricks, not using the same single tactic over and over and over. That's why you get to tag the aspect for free the first time, to encourage you to pull action-movie-like stunts like running from cover to cover or following up the old "throw dirt in his eyes" with a "pull the rug out from under him."

I Like the fate system but this seems a bit odd and I can see some really odd situations developing, like blinded characters fighting normally until someone spends a fate point.

Correction: When fighting a blinded guy, you only get a distinct advantage against him when you decide his blindness is narratively important (i.e. when you spend a Fate point). When it comes time for him to actually fight, the GM can and should compel that "Blinded" aspect liberally. Think Han Solo at the beginning of Return of the Jedi to see what a "Blinded" character looks like in a FATE fight scene.

[JosephKell]

Correction: When fighting a blinded guy, you only get a distinct advantage against him when you decide his blindness is narratively important (i.e. when you spend a Fate point). When it comes time for him to actually fight, the GM can and should compel that "Blinded" aspect liberally. Think Han Solo at the beginning of Return of the Jedi to see what a "Blinded" character looks like in a FATE fight scene.

The FATE step by step for Han Solo is...

Harrison Ford: "Boba Fett is right behind me, so I want to bat him with this staff thing."
Storyteller: "But you're blind.  I'll give you a fate point if you don't attack."
Harrison Ford: "No, I really want to hit him.  Here is a fate point to pay off the compel."  "Where is he?"  *Turn, slap boba fett and send him flying with his jet pack*

Then later...

Harrison Ford: "I'm gonna use this blaster to try to shoot the tentacle."
Storyteller puts a fate point on the table: "I think you're gonna miss outright."
Harrison Ford: "Crap, I don't have any fate points left to pay this off.  I guess I hate to miss."  *collect fate point*

[Papa Gruff]

It even makes some sense that you only get a free tag for taking cover behind lets say a rock. This is in no way only a benefit. The rock might obstruct your vision so that you might not see the bad guy that is trying to flank you, which might be compelled by the GM to give the flanker a bonus on his next attack (if he is willing to spend a fate point and if he is aware of the aspect).

You still are able to benefit from your dodge into cover, but you have to spend a FP to do so. As a GM I'd even allow shifting the cover to an other location near by, refreshing the aspect so to speak, to get an other free tag. That would of cause require an other maneuver first...

[CMEast]

Indeed, bare in mind that we are talking about cover in a system where your location is either this zone or that one, and that you might be the only person in the zone, or you might have 5 enemies in the same zone.

The game is a lot more fluid than most, a lot more abstract too in many ways. If I were blinded right now I'd struggle to make it from here to the bedroom without stubbing my toes and if there were an intruder in the bedroom I'd be in trouble. However if my current zone included the two rooms together, with other zones consisting of the hall and two other flats then in game terms I could be standing right behind the intruder ready to grapple him and it'd be quite possible that I could do that without any penalty.

[ema nymton]

Thanks for the replies as I said I like the system and will get used to this feature, and hopefully it will makes more sense when I see it in play.

Correction: When fighting a blinded guy, you only get a distinct advantage against him when you decide his blindness is narratively important (i.e. when you spend a Fate point). When it comes time for him to actually fight, the GM can and should compel that "Blinded" aspect liberally. Think Han Solo at the beginning of Return of the Jedi to see what a "Blinded" character looks like in a FATE fight scene.

Just a thought on this if the blinded guy is an NPC the GM will not be compelling him and therefore the blind aspect will only kick in when the players spend a fate point.

[CMEast]

Actually the GM can and should compel an aspect like that, whether it's for a PC or an NPC. It really depends on the nature of that aspect, if they were temporarily blinded then the GM might decide it can only be compelled by a PC, if blindness is more permanent or physical (eyes are covered up/removed) then the GM should compel it until the NPC does a manoeuvre (if possible) to get rid of the aspect.

[JesterOC]

This is something I had a lot of trouble with at first also.  I now view Aspects as have 2 parts. 1 part mechanical, 1 part narrative. Both are important and both should have some effect in the game. What the easy part is the mechanical side, you get a +2 or a re-roll. The hard part is the narrative, you can't make it too strong (Like putting an aspect called "Dead" on a target and ending a fight) nor should it be so weak as to not make any sense (Like saying a blinded sniper can shoot normally.)

I think the key is that the entire group in the conflict must agree on how strong the effect is.
For instance it would be easy to imagine a blinded werewolf not being effected by a Blinded aspect unless PC's actively drop the fate points to make it stick. That is because you can make assumptions that it can hear and smell the targets good enough for it not to matter.
On the other hand a blinded Sniper would be prohibited from firing anything effectively because it is hard to imagine how a sniper could engage a target without sight.

I hope this helps.

JesterOC

[Ophidimancer]

On the other hand a blinded Sniper would be prohibited from firing anything effectively because it is hard to imagine how a sniper could engage a target without sight.

So the sniper would be compelled to miss for no FP right after that Aspect is applied.  After that, the GM would compel the Blinded Aspect and offer the sniper a FP.  The sniper could keep missing and keep accruing FPs, could try and Maneuver to remove the Blinded Aspect, or could even concede if the Blinded Aspect feels like a severe Consequence.

[JesterOC]

Yes. After I finished the post, I realized I should have followed up with that info because I was not too clear on that. But I had not time. Thanks for stating it so clearly.