AOE Spell manuevers?

[Nyarlathotep5150]

Remember when you use the one free tag to effect everyone in the area the effect can be having a temporary aspect so If the enemy decide not to pay a fate point then each enemy will have an aspect to tag. An example of this would be to compel the area aspect 'super slippery surface' to cause all people in the area to fall thus giving them the 'fallen' aspect. In away Junkies method is more broken because the only resistance the enemy has to this effect is to spend a fate point which makes the maneuver useful just to strip a bunch of your enemies of fate points.

   I'm not sure I'm understanding what you're getting at here. Getting a free tag would only make effecting one of those targets free (even in a mass compel), the PC would still have to pay for the rest (in the same way that a mass compel requires a fate point per target, not just one fate point). So, yes, the enemies only defense would be to spend fate points to resist, but the effect would cost the PC massively, so thats fair, and only one of the targets wont be receiving a point for the inconvenience.

[devonapple]

So the issue you have with it is that the maneuver only affects a single zone? 

Not at all! My point is that there is a difference between:
A) an Environmental Aspect which can be Compelled against the PCs as well as the NPCs (This Building is On Fire), and
B) an Environmental Aspect (usually in a neighboring Zone) which can only be Compelled against the NPCs because the PCs aren't there to be affected (The Bad Guys' Car Is On Fire).

If a player were to move into the affected area of an evocation maneuver they would become subject to the effects of that maneuver (possible compels) just like an NPC that's already there.

Absolutely - you are correct!

[ryanshowseason2]

Why?  If you shoot out the lights with a gun that could be a maneuver placing the dark aspect on the scene.  If you throw a molotov cocktail into the middle of your opponents it would place the on fire aspect there.  I would say the only difference between evocation maneuvers that affect scene aspects and regular ones is that the evocation maneuver has a defined duration.

The difference here is that the light bulb was a pre existing condition of the scene that had to be there to make it happen in the first place. Magic is creating something out of literally nothing. Saying that a grease spell immediately effects the entire scene puts it on all zones at the same time and makes it usable against the caster. The intent isn't to cover the entire football field with grease, only the 50 yard line. Besides this I don't recall any rules for having magic effect the entirety of a scene, only for zones. Consequently there aren't any rules for having magic maneuver on a zone wide level either. But magic can maneuver on a single target and magic can attack on a zone wide level, so it stands to reason you would be able to maneuver against multiples.

This is the assumption I don't understand.  You have created a single aspect.  Therefore you get one single free tag, not one per affected person, to use or pass.  Yes, the next time they act they will have to contend with the new scene aspect, and may be compelled by it, but I think it would be a regular compel which they would get a fate point for accepting.

Your scene aspect logic is what confuses you in this respect. You're not allowing yourself to see it in another way. As in aspect on the character just like normal maneuvering works. When I maneuver behind someone to flank them it isn't a scene aspect! It is attached directly to the person, the same goes for single target magic maneuvers. Multi target maneuvers should do it in the same fashion rather than throwing it on the whole scene. The cost DOES need to be appropriate though.

I thought carefully about making it a zonewide block as well, but that didn't make sense either once someone breaks the block it is gone, so once one person makes it across the slick now everyone can? It immediately dispels? =/

I think I have a fairer idea though to make the cost match the effect. This is for evocation mind you.

1. The caster has to determine the amount of targets. If rote this will be pre determined and set in stone as to how many it can effect at once.

2. The spell Will cost -2 per zone + -3 for maneuver effects + -1 For each target.
( So an AOE 1 target would be ludicrous an ill advised. A 2 target would be on par, and savings at 3 target)

3. Duration would be added at -1 per target + -2 per zone.

4. Just like a block, power could be fed in each turn. A rote spell could only be fed into if another rote spell existed for that sole purpose.

5. Each target gains the desired aspect that is a free tag once, only casting again would allow for another free tag.

6. The target gains a fate point each time the aspect is used against them.

7. The aspect may be used as either a compel at cast time or tag for +2 attacking-2 defending or re-roll if attacking.

8. Additional targets walking in will increase required power automatically, this can easily throw you out of rote spell mode. If you can't control the excess power and go into backlash the spell continues, fallout discontinues the spell immediately and does not effect the current targets.

I think this limits the scope of the concept enough to make it useful but not so powerful as to effect 500 enemies in the same zone for 5 shifts of power.

[Becq]

I'm inclined to think that it would not be entirely unreasonable to make a house rule that allowed a caster to apply the "2 shifts of power makes it affect a zone" capability to a maneuver spell, thus creating an aspect on each target in the zone, with a free tag on each.

Too powerful?  Consider the following logic:

Let say I'm fighting against a group of mooks.  They're not terribly strong, and barring terrible luck I find that a 3 shift (weapon:3) attack spell is enough to leave one of them with a mild consequence (with the usual free tag).  Alternatively, I could cast a maneuver spell for 3 shifts to place an aspect (and free tag) on the target, though unless I boosted the spell power the aspect would last only one exchange (as opposed to the remainder of this scene and next scene for the consequence).

But taking on one mook at a time isn't going to cut it.  Luckily, they've grouped up to bolster their courage, so I could (assuming reasonable rolls) expect that a 5 shift (weapon:3, 1 zone AoE) attack spell would leave them all with a mild consequence, along with a free tag *each*.  For only +2 shifts to the power of the spell.

So given that the maneuver option is weaker (due to limited duration), why shouldn't it be reasonable to be able to create a similar effect with a maneuver spell?

Another way of looking at it: If I cast a maneuver on myself, then used the free tag +2 to boost the damage on a later AoE attack spell that affected everyone in the mob, how is that different that casting an AoE maneuver against a mob, then later casting an AoE attack spell and tagging each of those aspects to get a +2 against the the target it was attached to?

Am I missing some major point of balance?

[ways and means]

I could see one potential problem with area of effect manoeuvres which is the possibility of multiple tagging. I am pretty certain there must be a rule somewhere in the core book forbidding this but say you caused eight enemies to have the temporary aspect 'stunned' then you might be able to tag all of the eight enemies free 'stunned' tags in your next area of effect spell to gain a +16. 

[devonapple]

I'm not sure: do the rules let a player "free tag" (or even know) a Consequence that their character inflicted? I may have overlooked this aspect of the rules, so please let me know if this is an explicit option.

True, it is an Aspect which the player ostensibly placed on the opponent.

However, would the reverse be true? When an NPC forces a PC to take a Consequence, would the NPC automatically know the Consequence, and be able to tag it once for free?

Or would Players prefer Consequences be kept to themselves until the NPC succeeds at an Assessment action to figure out the PC is wounded/winded/tired/sprained/etc.?

[Steppenwolf]

Yes, Consequences are aspects which can be tagged
And no, you don't need any assessment. Consequences are usually known

[devonapple]

Yes, Consequences are aspects which can be tagged

Well, yes, they are, and they can be, if known.

Where I'm uncertain on the rules is: are Consequences automatically known by the one who created them? I'm forgetting.

[Steppenwolf]

YS105:

There are several ways you can gain access to an aspect that is on another character or scene:

Inflict a consequence

[devonapple]

Thanks, Steppenwolf! That will suffice.

Are GMs generally having their NPCs Compel/Invoke those Consequences, or do most of us give the PCs a pass?

[ryanshowseason2]

I'm inclined to think that it would not be entirely unreasonable to make a house rule that allowed a caster to apply the "2 shifts of power makes it affect a zone" capability to a maneuver spell, thus creating an aspect on each target in the zone, with a free tag on each.

Too powerful?  Consider the following logic:

Let say I'm fighting against a group of mooks.  They're not terribly strong, and barring terrible luck I find that a 3 shift (weapon:3) attack spell is enough to leave one of them with a mild consequence (with the usual free tag).  Alternatively, I could cast a maneuver spell for 3 shifts to place an aspect (and free tag) on the target, though unless I boosted the spell power the aspect would last only one exchange (as opposed to the remainder of this scene and next scene for the consequence).

But taking on one mook at a time isn't going to cut it.  Luckily, they've grouped up to bolster their courage, so I could (assuming reasonable rolls) expect that a 5 shift (weapon:3, 1 zone AoE) attack spell would leave them all with a mild consequence, along with a free tag *each*.  For only +2 shifts to the power of the spell.

So given that the maneuver option is weaker (due to limited duration), why shouldn't it be reasonable to be able to create a similar effect with a maneuver spell?

Another way of looking at it: If I cast a maneuver on myself, then used the free tag +2 to boost the damage on a later AoE attack spell that affected everyone in the mob, how is that different that casting an AoE maneuver against a mob, then later casting an AoE attack spell and tagging each of those aspects to get a +2 against the the target it was attached to?

Am I missing some major point of balance?

Wow I completely forgot about that, and the ability to tag consequences you inflicted. Is that rule intended for the person who inflicted the consequence? I believe it is. A spell maneuver would still be worth something in my opinion because anyone could tag that temporary aspect, the same goes for maneuvering yourself. However you have brought up a good point and the cost of such a thing should be in the neighborhood of this. I especially appreciate the concept that it is a consequence for *each* combatant.

I could see one potential problem with area of effect manoeuvres which is the possibility of multiple tagging. I am pretty certain there must be a rule somewhere in the core book forbidding this but say you caused eight enemies to have the temporary aspect 'stunned' then you might be able to tag all of the eight enemies free 'stunned' tags in your next area of effect spell to gain a +16. 

This probably falls under GM common sense, but I look at it this way. You're aiming at an entire zone! Your aim which is the equivalent of hitting the broadside of a barn isn't improved by enemies being stunned since you're gunning for an area. Now their individual ability to defend *IS* effected by their being stunned. Which will net them each probly 2 more damage a piece. *NOT* the caster getting some silly bonus to aim better at the barn, the barn would have to have an aspect that made it easier to aim at, like "x marks the spot", or "bullseye"

tldr: You're aiming at a general area not all the individual combatants at once.