Simplifying a spell for more shifts

[Runhide]

I know I read somewhere in the book that you can change/focus/simplify a spell to get shifts out of it but I dont know where and cant find it.  Anyone know where it is?  The idea was to change a general spell and only allow it to have one effect.



   

[devonapple]

Would you be able to come up with an example that would fit what you recall? I think the only thing that can really reduce the cost of a spell is with Thaumaturgy and decreasing the duration: taking an effect with an assumed duration (like a ward, which would by default last until sunrise, or a few hours), and shortening that duration (to fifteen minutes, for example).

[Runhide]

Well something like a fire spell that only lights candles rather than shoots a fireballs.  It only ever can light candles maybe even only candles in your house.

[Richard_Chilton]

You could always take a risk.

Most of the spells are written to account for the target rolling +4 when he's targeted.  If you'll wiling to take the chance you could redesign the spell so it only works if the target rolls 0 or lower.  You're still over the bump on the bell curve - 61.7% of success.

Check out:
http://hill-kleerup.org/pmwiki/FATE/FUDGEDice
for the odds of rolling numbers in FATE.  If you feel lucky then you can cut corners this way.

Richard

[MijRai]

Cantrip-type spells can be done for no stress. Lighting a candle, lightly shutting a door, etc. However, as soon as it is used in conflict, it does cost stress. Is that what you were thinking of?

[devonapple]

For reference, "Mundane Effects": YS, p 259:

"Sometimes, you might want to produce an effect that doesn’t really do anything but add color to a scene. The most common example of this is a light spell, which very seldom does anything but provide the fact that there is light to see by and then fades neatly into the background. Minor effects like these are usually assumed to be within the scope of evocation maneuvers; however, they rarely require a roll or cost any stress, especially when incorporating a focus like the wizard’s pentacle or staff. You might consider them “pre-school magic”—what wizard apprentices would learn as their very first spells. Any minor effect like this can be cast without a roll and will last for a scene for free. At most, a fate point might be required if the minor effect counters a scene aspect that might be inconvenient."

[Runhide]

Found it (Y279) thanks for all the help.

If you are willing to lock the item down to
only ever being useful for one specific spell—
such as an established evocation rote or a divination
spell that always looks for the same
thing—then you get a single free “slot upgrade”
(as described below) to add an extra +1 bonus.
You can’t benefit from the same type of bonus
(e.g., a control bonus) from two or more items
at the same time—so if you had two items, one
with a +2 control bonus and another with a +1
control bonus, the total effect is a +2 to control.
Example: Evan Montrose has three focus
item slots. He could make a single wand that
takes up all three slots, giving him +3 offensive
power for wind evocation only, or he could split
the bonuses up, for +2 offensive power and
+1 offensive control. He could also make it
more multi-purpose, taking just a +1 offensive
power bonus, but applying it to wind, water,
and earth evocations.

[sinker]

That seems to be talking about focus items and not spells, so yeah, if you had a focus item that only lit candles then it could be better than normal, but it would only be useful for when you are lighting candles.