Claws and grapple.Extra physical stress boxes and the catch.Compels.

[noom777]

Three more small questions:
First:Does the claw/fangs ability increase your free damage you do to your opponent as a supplemental action when you have grappled your opponent like inhuman strength does?
Second:When an ability gives you bonus physical stress boxes and your opponent damages you with the item of your catch, can you assign the physical damage you take from that attack to the bonus boxes that the ability with the catch gave you ?
Third:When you take advantage of a newly created aspect you can tag it for free the first time but can that tag be used for a compel?
Thanks again for the support!

[UmbraLux]

First:Does the claw/fangs ability increase your free damage you do to your opponent as a supplemental action when you have grappled your opponent like inhuman strength does?

Not by default.  Probably wouldn't be game breaking to allow if it makes sense.  (To me, it may make sense for a were-gorilla but not for a were-wolf.)

Second:When an ability gives you bonus physical stress boxes and your opponent damages you with the item of your catch, can you assign the physical damage you take from that attack to the bonus boxes that the ability with the catch gave you ?

Nope.  If your catch is met, extra stress and consequences from toughness powers don't exist.

Third:When you take advantage of a newly created aspect you can tag it for free the first time but can that tag be used for a compel?

Short answer is "yes".  Longer answer is "the player invokes for effect which initiates a GM compel (with fate point) to the target".  In other words, the compellee is still offered a fate point, it just comes from the GM's endless stash.

[computerking]

Short answer is "yes".  Longer answer is "the player invokes for effect which initiates a GM compel (with fate point) to the target".  In other words, the compellee is still offered a fate point, it just comes from the GM's endless stash.

And there may be a GM/Target negotiation regarding how the compel affects them.

[Becq]

First:Does the claw/fangs ability increase your free damage you do to your opponent as a supplemental action when you have grappled your opponent like inhuman strength does?

Not by default.  Probably wouldn't be game breaking to allow if it makes sense.  (To me, it may make sense for a were-gorilla but not for a were-wolf.)

I'm not sure this is true.  The grapple rule says this:

if you so choose, you can freely make an unopposed attack, movement, or maneuver on your opponent as a supplemental action, which has a value of 1 shift

If you decide that your "unopposed attack" is going to be an unarmed attack, then the Claws power says you get to add weapon:2 to it, for a total of 3 stress.  My reasoning here is that if they meant that you could inflict 1 stress, they would have said so, but instead they said you could make and "unopposed attack which has avalue of 1 shift".  Note that the sidebar specifically points out that Strength powers add their damage bonuses to this sort of attack, though its also true that Strength powers specifically state that they increase grapple damage.

Still, there's a grapple scene in Saving Private Ryan that springs to mind, here.  It makes me thing that someone wielding an appropriate weapon (like a knife) in a grapple should be able to use it with that grapple attack.  I'd vote against someone attempting to use a sword or a rifle, but a knife, claws, and possibly even a pistol seem reasonable to me based on my vast experience garnered from watching grapples in movies...  :p

Besides, this adds a new dimension to grapples, as the two combatants duel with maneuvers to try to grab that pistol...

[UmbraLux]

The paragraph after your quote does call it a "one-shift hit" but, as mentioned previously, I don't have anything against using claws or other weapons in a grapple - as long as it makes sense.  I do like your idea of adding a tactical dimension to grapples.

On a side note, you've got me rereading the grapple rules...and they appear extremely one sided.  Whomever initiates the grapple can set up a block and do automatic damage on subsequent rounds.  On the other hand, the victim's option is to <do something> to break the block and, until he succeeds, take it.  There doesn't appear to be room for jujitsu or wrestling style 'chess matches'.  Too abstract I guess.

[sinker]

Actually the "Something" that the grapplee does to break the grapple could include grappling the opponent. Since the grappler is currently engaged in a grapple with the person attempting the new grapple one could decide to bypass the necessary aspect invocation since that's primarily to explain how the person can engage in the grapple.

[UmbraLux]

I agree.  It could also be an attack.  But that initial block gives the initiating grappler a significant advantage.  He can continue grappling at full skill rating while the grapplee is at skill minus block.  Even if he does succeed in setting up a grapple it will probably be easily broken by the first guy.

[Becq]

The paragraph after your quote does call it a "one-shift hit"

Right.  A "one-shift hit", not a "one-stress hit".  Consider the baseline rules for attacks: you do a contested roll to determine if there's a hit, and if so how many shifts the attacker gets for the attack.  You then translate shifts into stress by adding weapon rating and subtracting armor (and maybe adding other modifiers, such as for Strength powers or stunts).  So by saying that the grappler gets "an unopposed attack ... which has a value of one shift" or can "inflict a one-shift hit", the wording implies that this is an attack that is assumed to hack skipped the contested roll and gets an automatic one-shift result.  Then it seems as though you'd translate this into stress by adding (appropriate) weapons and subtracting armor.  (Note that "Any successful attack adds the weapon value to the stress inflicted, but subtracts any relevant
armor value" (YS202) and the grapple rules indicate that this is in fact an attack that has succeeded to the tune of one shift).

I hadn't noticed this before, and to be honest I'm not sure that this is what the designers intended, but it does seem to be what it says -- and I can't see any alternate wording in related sections that would lead to a different conclusion (which is known to happen from time to time in the RAW).  If it had been worded as "inflicting one stress", then I'd go with that, since weapons only affect attacks.  As a side effect, this also seems to mean that someone with mundane armor may or may not reduce the stress depending on whether the means of inflicting the damage would make the armor useful (I've kind of assumed all along that Toughness powers would apply, making a character possessing them largely immune to grapple damage from characters without a grapple damage bonus).

Aha!  As I'm writing this and looking through the rules, I think I've found a loophole that probably counter my argument.  You see, grapples are governed by Might.  And Might does not include trappings for any weaponry, so technically the weapon ratings wouldn't apply.  Unless, of course, you had a stunt that either allowed you to add a weapon trapping to Might, or to grapple using a skill that had a weapon trapping.  Of course, this still leaves the question of whether armor rating (particular

Still, I like the idea; it might be worth working into a house rule of some sort (or a stunt).