temporary aspects

[Rubycon]

Hi,
I'm new to the FATEsystem as well as to the DFRPG. As I'm reading through the rulebook, i was wondering if there is such a thing like "standard" temporary aspects to a scene in certain circumstances. I think that certain applications of skills lead to certain aspects over and over again, maybe with small changes, but small anyway.
A funny example came to my mind:
Imagine a scene were a group of children were playing ball in the yard. At some time, the ball smashes through a window. As sure as hell, this event will immediately lead to one of the following aspects: Either THAT WAS NONE OF US or IT WAS ME, BUT NOT INTENTIONALLY!

So, my question to all of you is, if there are such temporary aspects that are coming regularly and if so, can they be described and classified to save time at the gaming table?

[Masurao]

If I am not mistaking, the wonderful thing of aspects is just that you do not have to think of all of them in advance, or standardize them You'll probably see a lot of attempts at getting a scene to be Dark or Shadowy, perhaps Slippery When Wet when it rains or the sprinklers are on. The fun part is (and should be) that you, as a GM, don't have to think of every little detail about a scene, while, as a player, you get the freedom to come up with awesome traits for a scene.

There is very good example of this in the book, with a player making an attempt at a declaration about a building he wants to burgle. The player declares that there might be some form of vent on the outside, he may attempt to enter. The GM might allow this flat out, ask him to roll for it and see the outcome or flat out deny it, because he did establish just that fact.

I can see what you'd want to do, but even without any experience playing this game, I do feel it would lessen the overall fun and challenge of DF when you standardize aspects. For example with your example, what if one of the kids had been annoying that afternoon, very boastful and insulting. The aspect might become All Fingers Pointing at Him

[Rubycon]

I get your point. But most of the aspects you mentioned are aspects of places and can be developed (or discovered) by the characters. But what is about aspects developed by skllrolls of characters (or NPCs). Aiming a gun, creeping in the shadows and things like that will occur very often and will lead - depending on success or failure - to very simular results. So aspects like FREEZE OR DIE will work the same way in most scenes where they come up. At least i think so. Maybe a short playtesting will tell me otherwise...

[Masurao]

Ah, I see... Well, you should remind yourself that such rolls can be opposed and a GM doesn't have to tell a player whether or not he succeeded. And if a player does it too often, you can ask him to be somewhat more creative. Also, if a character is repetitive in such things, his enemies will start to use it against him, but only if it is really excessively repetitive.

Perhaps others have more experience with this in play.

[noclue]

If the player can't be bothered to come up with something interesting with the aspect, I don't think the GM should be bothered to give it to him. Repetitious aspects are fast...and boring. YMMV of course.

[Sanctaphrax]

Repitition is not always a problem. Some maneuvers are just there to give you +2 to your next roll. And that's fine. For those, pre-set aspects are not a bad idea.

[sinker]

Agreed. There are plenty of times (Aiming is a great example of this) where you just want to lay down an aspect, get your +2 and be done. There is nothing wrong with using the same aspect over and over in that situation, and most of the time players will actually gravitate to that because it's simple. When you think of a decent aspect for an action you're likely to repeat it's easy to repeat the aspect as well.

However you'll often find that creativity can be very rewarding. Tailoring your aspect to the situation can lead to great suggestions for how to invoke for effect/compel, and compels are the real teeth of the fate point. Using your example, neither of those aspects suggests a great compel, however Masurao's does.

[noclue]

Repitition is not always a problem. Some maneuvers are just there to give you +2 to your next roll. And that's fine. For those, pre-set aspects are not a bad idea.

Sure, they're not always a problem. But if it occurs infrequently enough that it isn't a problem, you don't need to spend much time comming up with pre-selected aspects. If it occurs frequently enough that you should spend that time, I'd probably find the situations uninspiring.

Nothing wrong with it. I just don't think you really need the training wheels.

[Rubycon]

Agreed. There are plenty of times (Aiming is a great example of this) where you just want to lay down an aspect, get your +2 and be done. There is nothing wrong with using the same aspect over and over in that situation, and most of the time players will actually gravitate to that because it's simple. When you think of a decent aspect for an action you're likely to repeat it's easy to repeat the aspect as well.

However you'll often find that creativity can be very rewarding. Tailoring your aspect to the situation can lead to great suggestions for how to invoke for effect/compel, and compels are the real teeth of the fate point. Using your example, neither of those aspects suggests a great compel, however Masurao's does.

That was my view of it, thank you. Of course, pre-set aspects should not replace creativity, but I would handle such things by rewarding creativity, not hindering standard procedures. Additionally, I like a fast pace when it comes to combat. And a have the feeling (not the experience) that building aspects can slow down the pace of a scene unnecessarily. That was where I was coming from...