Practical Application of (a specific) Death Curse

[Radecliffe]

I don't think I agree with the "of any type" part.  Dying and the Death Curse are a physical act.  I don't think mental or social "extra" consequences should be used.  That said the RAW don't really specify one way or the other so that would probably be up to the interpretation of the GM and the players. 

[UmbraLux]

I'm not sure if extra social consequences should count (from stunts or Presence ratings of 5 or above). They don't provide power for any other type of magic, and I find it hard to see how they could apply here.

Actually I think they do - if I remember correctly it's one of the book examples.  Have to look for it later though, going to be busy for a few hours.

Edit:  The social consequence in the book was to a standard consequence slot I think.  But consequences are consequences, I don't differentiate based on where they came from.

[Tedronai]

• shifts equal to all consequences (of any type) not previously taken
• one free tag per consequence - (two shifts per tag)

I think you're applying these two in reverse order, and it makes a substantial difference.
I do not believe you get the free tag for consequences inflicted as part of the enactment of the DC.

[UmbraLux]

Actually I think they do - if I remember correctly it's one of the book examples. 

It's on YS269 - "This does not have to be direct injury, as stated above; any consequence will work..."  That is for normal thaumaturgy and goes on to state it needs to be justifiable as contributing to the spell prep.  The sidebar even notes some social or mental consequences taken / caused by Sells.  It consumed his life and brought hollowness and misery to the Beckitts.  While not stated, it also cost him his wife and family. 

I think you're applying these two in reverse order, and it makes a substantial difference.
I do not believe you get the free tag for consequences inflicted as part of the enactment of the DC.

Hadn't really intended an order in the list above.  That said, I think I did count it that way in the play example.  Rereading YS282, you're probably correct.  Have to retcon the example if I use it again...perhaps inflicting that last consequence as part of a declaration...which gives you the +2 again.

It might be worth reiterating that I think declarations are easily abused.  :/  It's why we put soft caps in place.

[Chrono]

Either way it is a great story bit.

[Rougarou]

I think you're applying these two in reverse order, and it makes a substantial difference.
I do not believe you get the free tag for consequences inflicted as part of the enactment of the DC.

I would say that you can. YS282 says all the consequences he has can be tagged, and additional consequences can be inflicted. It doesn't seem to be concrete on the order and, since it's the last thing that character will do, I see no reason not to let them tag the consequences they inflict.

[Tedronai]

It doesn't seem to be concrete on the order and

It is quite inherently concrete on the order, actually.

Tag all existing consequences.
Done?  Good.
Now inflict additional consequences if you have space.

[Rougarou]

It is quite inherently concrete on the order, actually.

Tag all existing consequences.
Done?  Good.
Now inflict additional consequences if you have space.

But it says "and" not "then." If I were to tell you that today I'm going to a bar and going to work, I'm saying nothing of the order in which I plan to do those things.

I'm not saying that my opinion is definitely right here, and I definitely see where your opinion comes from, but I feel the language is open enough to allow for either interpretation.

Like many things in the rules, it's ultimately going to come down to individual GMs on this matter.

[Mr. Death]

Where else in the game does it allow you to double dip on a consequence or other aspect on a single effect?

[Radecliffe]

Where else in the game does it allow you to double dip on a consequence or other aspect on a single effect?

No where that I am aware of but a death curse is a singularly unique type of event.  One fully deserving of its own unique mechanic as far as I am concerned. 

[Becq]

Where else in the game does it allow you to double dip on a consequence or other aspect on a single effect?

How is it double dipping?  There are two mechanics applying here.  First, you may inflict consequences to contribute their shift value to a spell.  Second, you may invoke aspects (if justifyable) to contribute +2 shifts to the spell.  Under the standard thaumaturgy rules, I read it as legitimate to inflict, say, a serious consequence on yourself for +6 shifts, then spend a Fate to invoke the resulting aspect for another +2.  This assumes that you can justify drawing on the aspect to benefit the spell, and that you have too much available Fate and too few available/appropriate aspects.

I can see the argument about timing, and agree that it's not entirely clearly defined.  However, it does state in the Death Curse sidebar that Death Curses count as rituals but with the normal preparation replaced by the circumstances of death (can only tag and inflict consequences, so no sitting out scenes!).  But the general thaumaturgy rules allow the various methods of preparation to be "combined in any way you choose" (YS268), which does not appear to be over-ruled in the sidebar.

That said, even though I think the rules allow for you to inflict a consequence then tag it, I think that balance would be better served by allowing the character to do only one or the other.  Meh, tables can work this out as they want.  However, the two likely resolutions work out to:
1) the shift value of all unused consequences, plus two shifts for each used consequence (assuming the order matters) OR
2) the shift value of all unused consequences, plus two shifts for every consequence slot on the sheet (assuming you can use either/both options in the order you see fit)
Take your pick.

As an interesting aside, either option results in stronger death curses from wizards who happen to have extra consequences (from high ratings in the stress-track skills or certain stunts).  Just having the Resilient Self-Image stunt, for example, adds at least +4 (and possibly up to +8, with option 2 above) to the potential strength of a death curse.

[Mr. Death]

I see it as double dipping because you're getting two benefits at once for the same aspect.

[UmbraLux]

It really doesn't matter much.  Either you take the consequence and then get a free tag* or you simply declare something related as you do.  "I push towards the monster in spite of the claws Ripping Out My Guts (consequence) and without defending at all reach out and Grab It's Throat (declaration).  Or something else.  Declarations are too easy by the book.

*I tend to agree with Tedronai's interpretation after he pointed it out.  It does state "...all of the consequences he has can be tagged, and he can can inflict more...if he has the space..."

I just don't think it matters much either way.

[Becq]

The DC sidebar could also be read as not allowing declarations, by the way.  It seems to me to indicate that while thaumaturgy normally allows four components of preparation (invoke aspects, make declarations, accept or inflict consequences, and skip scenes), for the death curse "the components of preparation are the circumstances of the wizard’s death—all of the consequences he has can be tagged, and he can inflict more upon himself if he’s got the space".  It makes sense that skipping scenes is right out, but it also leaves out declarations -- possibly deliberately, on the basis that preparation declarations represent mini-scenes, which there is no time for.

[UmbraLux]

You don't consider "the circumstances of his death" to be declarations?  Blood seems to allow for lots of useful 'circumstances' by itself.  But perhaps you're correct...in that case Death Curses aren't going to be very effective unless the wizard chooses to concede (and die) unreasonably (IMO) early.