Easy Light Spell

[Dougansf]

Apologies if these are repeat questions, but I've looked and searched and found nothing.

At various times, Harry casts a "simple" spell to light the area.  Either "Flickum Bicus" or light from his pentacle amulet.  These seem to be very easy for him, and yet they don't even make it onto his Rote spell list in the book.

DFRPG mechanically speaking, this seems to be a Maneuver to place an aspect on a location (Dimly lit, what have you).  With Flickum the candles are lit and don't need to be maintained.  The amulet however needs to have enough power to last the whole scene, often while in combat.  Is there a recommendation for making spells not cost Stress?  Refinement maybe?

In most situations, the light spell wouldn't be contested, but what if you're trying to expose a stealthy person in the shadows?  How about casting light against a magical darkness (I imagine comparing shifts would come into play here)?

Thanks

[Chrono]

Shifts makes the most sense, a lore or discipline check versus a stealth check, just like a regular maneuver contested roll. Or you could have a player spend a fate point to simply create the aspect on the scene, but the opposed skill checks make more sense. I think it is fun giving skill checks a slight magical flavor if they are made by a wizard, and I see no need in making her take mental stress for such things.

[Haru]

There is a box about "mundane spell effects" somewhere in the book. Simply put: a spellcasting character can do small spells without any effort. Making light, lighting the fireplace, generally, things that don't really have an impact on the narrative (Harry could flick a lightswitch or take some matches, but it is just cooler for a wizard to do it with magic).

If you are in a conflict however, that does not apply. So in your situation, the hidden character would have rolled a stealth "block", he is hidden. He probably tagged some aspects ("dark shadows") for example. Now the PC come in and you let them make an alertness roll to see if they can spot him. Since it is dark, the wizard might make some light, but since this is a conflict, he would have to do it as a maneuver. Maneuver spells in general last the entire scene, so you don't have to put extra shifts in duration. The new aspect ("light") now cancels out the shadow aspect, and since it is gone, it can no longer give a bonus to the stealth roll, which might be enough for the players to see the hidden character.

If you are casting against a darkness spell, the higher powered spell should prevail. A maneuver needs at least 3 shifts, but you can put in more to increase its power, so it is harder to resist it.

[Sanctaphrax]

There is a box about "mundane spell effects" somewhere in the book.

Your Story, page 259.

[JDK002]

There is a box about "mundane spell effects" somewhere in the book. Simply put: a spellcasting character can do small spells without any effort. Making light, lighting the fireplace, generally, things that don't really have an impact on the narrative (Harry could flick a lightswitch or take some matches, but it is just cooler for a wizard to do it with magic).

If you are in a conflict however, that does not apply. So in your situation, the hidden character would have rolled a stealth "block", he is hidden. He probably tagged some aspects ("dark shadows") for example. Now the PC come in and you let them make an alertness roll to see if they can spot him. Since it is dark, the wizard might make some light, but since this is a conflict, he would have to do it as a maneuver. Maneuver spells in general last the entire scene, so you don't have to put extra shifts in duration. The new aspect ("light") now cancels out the shadow aspect, and since it is gone, it can no longer give a bonus to the stealth roll, which might be enough for the players to see the hidden character.

If you are casting against a darkness spell, the higher powered spell should prevail. A maneuver needs at least 3 shifts, but you can put in more to increase its power, so it is harder to resist it.

This seems to be a general misconception about magical maneuvers, unless RAW contradicts itself at some point.  Magical maneuvers do not last the entire scene, assuming we're talking conflict, according to the RAW.  YS 253 (pertaining to magical maneuvers) "As with other effects, you can pay an additional shift to make the effect persistent at the rate of 1 shift per additional exchange."

Though in the case of trying to detect someone in stealth, using a light maneuver then tagging it for an alertness roll (versus the npc's stealth) revealing the target.  If I were the GM I would say it doesn't really matter if the light aspect goes away next turn.  You've uncovered the npc from stealth, it wouldn't make sense that he could suddenly vanish once the aspect was gone, unless he has powers that actually let him vanish haha.

I would do it like that as opposed to a block or defense because the GM doing a roll of any kind basically tells the players that someone is lurking around somewhere.  Then they may start playing in ways that can break the scene.  Where as a general altertness roll made by the players doesn't force you to tip you hand quite so badly.

[Dougansf]

Thanks for all your answers.

This seems to be a general misconception about magical maneuvers, unless RAW contradicts itself at some point.  Magical maneuvers do not last the entire scene, assuming we're talking conflict, according to the RAW.  YS 253 (pertaining to magical maneuvers) "As with other effects, you can pay an additional shift to make the effect persistent at the rate of 1 shift per additional exchange."

This goes into my other big problem in the Evocation system, duration (or persistence) seems horribly expensive.  Not particularly on par with the books either, at least as far as the Shield Bracelet spell goes.  And I've seen in another post that permanent Enchantment items got removed at the last minute before printing.

Opinions?  Any recommendations on making spells last longer, but don't break the game?

[GryMor]

Use thaumaturgy instead of evocation if you need something to last?

Edit: This is assuming that, for some reason, what you want to do isn't covered by the mundane effects clause of Evocation. If it is covered by mundane effects, then there is no reason not to do it with Evocation.

[Haru]

This seems to be a general misconception about magical maneuvers, unless RAW contradicts itself at some point.  Magical maneuvers do not last the entire scene, assuming we're talking conflict, according to the RAW.  YS 253 (pertaining to magical maneuvers) "As with other effects, you can pay an additional shift to make the effect persistent at the rate of 1 shift per additional exchange."

Hmm, I am pretty sure I read that somewhere. If not in the book, then maybe in one of the Q&A with Fred about magic? If anyone knows what I am talking about and can provide a source, I would appreciate it.

But still, I would rule it to be so, for the most parts it just makes sense, you are setting things in motion, and they simply keep their momentum. And it just feels extremely unsatisfying if it would go poof after one exchange, or maybe 3 tops. Highly frustrating. And some maneuvers can't be reversed after they have been set up. A maneuver that destroys a light bulb to create a "darkness" aspect could not be removed, since the light bulb would not magically be repaired, one the maneuver spell expires.

Thanks for all your answers.

This goes into my other big problem in the Evocation system, duration (or persistence) seems horribly expensive.  Not particularly on par with the books either, at least as far as the Shield Bracelet spell goes.  And I've seen in another post that permanent Enchantment items got removed at the last minute before printing.

Opinions?  Any recommendations on making spells last longer, but don't break the game?

There is a reason why Harry usually either shields or blasts, not very often does he do both. A prolonged shield spell can be done with 2 spells: the first one puts up a block, the second one puts duration into the spell, 1 exchange per shift. That way, you can set up the maximum power into the shield instead of splitting shifts.

As for permanent enchantments, one houserule I have mentioned frequently, and one that I approve of is the one where you can use defensive enchanted items reactively. That means, when you botch your dodge roll, you can still use your enchanted wintercoat to stop the bullets. It does, of course, use up a charge as usual. That makes defensive enchanted items a little more viable, I think.

[Mr. Death]

Hmm, I am pretty sure I read that somewhere. If not in the book, then maybe in one of the Q&A with Fred about magic? If anyone knows what I am talking about and can provide a source, I would appreciate it.

I remember something in the books about creating effects of a duration, and it mentions something along the lines of, "If it only has to last the scene, then why aren't you just using evocation?" Is that it?

But still, I would rule it to be so, for the most parts it just makes sense, you are setting things in motion, and they simply keep their momentum. And it just feels extremely unsatisfying if it would go poof after one exchange, or maybe 3 tops. Highly frustrating. And some maneuvers can't be reversed after they have been set up. A maneuver that destroys a light bulb to create a "darkness" aspect could not be removed, since the light bulb would not magically be repaired, one the maneuver spell expires.

I think it depends on the spell and its effect. If the effect is "create light" by conjuring a ball of fire in your hand, yeah, it's only going to last as long as the spell does, and for that, you need the duration. If the effect is "create light" by lighting a torch or setting the room on fire, that aspect's going to last at least the scene.

[Jimmy]

You could handle it using evocation by using it as a maneuver to place an aspect of 'Well Lit' on the scene. 3 shifts for the maneuver, and however many you want for duration, or by possibly extending the spell the next exchange. If you wanted to apply that aspect for longer, you'd need to use thaumaturgy. Simple Complexity (lighting a torch is fairly easy) and maybe even no need for a duration pump (15 mins is default i believe?).

[Haru]

I remember something in the books about creating effects of a duration, and it mentions something along the lines of, "If it only has to last the scene, then why aren't you just using evocation?" Is that it?

No, I don't think so. It stated, that spell maneuvers should last a scene.

I think it depends on the spell and its effect. If the effect is "create light" by conjuring a ball of fire in your hand, yeah, it's only going to last as long as the spell does, and for that, you need the duration. If the effect is "create light" by lighting a torch or setting the room on fire, that aspect's going to last at least the scene.

Now I don't think that's good form. That way, you practically force the player to come up with a way to make a lasting maneuver effect, which in many ways, I believe, will reduce the coolness of effects as a whole. If he can make lasting maneuvers with evocations, then it shouldn't depend so much on how its worded. A floating point of glowing light that illuminates the scene should be just as valid as lighting a torch, the difference should just be in flavor, not in the mechanics. Especially, if they essentially do the same thing.

Also, conflicts are often based around stacking aspects. You can't stack something that will only last one exchange. Yes, you could work with the duration rules, but I don't think that maneuvers actually need them. If nobody opposes an aspect, then it is probably not all that powerful in itself. And if someone opposes an aspect, it will be gone once that character is finished with it.

Edit:
Found it.
http://www.jimbutcheronline.com/bb/index.php/topic,30067.msg1292407.html#msg1292407

Magic maneuvers. Do they have a duration based on the spell, or whether or not they are sticky? In other words if I maneuver is the aspect going to stick around for a number of exchanges equal to the shifts I devoted to duration, or is it going to stick around for the scene or until someone does something about it?

I'd probably treat them as a scene thing. Maneuvers are so lightweight, really. Persistence primarily matters with things like blocks and such. But I have a feeling I'm breaking the rules if I say it's so (I didn't write them).

[Jimmy]

See this is where I'm finding the rules a little contradictory. Using Examples of Magic pg YS293 the spell Entanglement states this is an offensive maneuver, 3 shifts for effect and 1 additional duration to last a scene as a sticky aspect. Supports your quote right there. However under the Maneuvers section starting page YS252 and continued on 253 it specifically states:

As with other effects, you pay an additional shift to make the effect persistent at the rate of 1 shift per additional exchange.

The example below that entry shows that it takes 3 shifts for the temporary aspect to manifest and an additional 3 shifts to make it last for 4 exchanges. So...what gives?

[Dougansf]

See this is where I'm finding the rules a little contradictory. Using Examples of Magic pg YS293 the spell Entanglement states this is an offensive maneuver, 3 shifts for effect and 1 additional duration to last a scene as a sticky aspect. Supports your quote right there. However under the Maneuvers section starting page YS252 and continued on 253 it specifically states:

As with other effects, you pay an additional shift to make the effect persistent at the rate of 1 shift per additional exchange.

The example below that entry shows that it takes 3 shifts for the temporary aspect to manifest and an additional 3 shifts to make it last for 4 exchanges. So...what gives?

Good catch Jimmy. 

I see that as a situational option.
I could make an argument for certain Maneuver spells that are constantly channeling power require shifts for persistence (which fits for the Amulet light).  Sadly this still sounds like a decent amount of Mental Stress for a "simple spell."
But others could just as easily put a Sticky Temp Aspect on the scene, which is far easier (like Flickum Bikus, or plain old "The Building is On Fire").

Having looked over the Thaumaturgy rules again, it certainly does sound like that's the best mechanic option.  A decent Lore (+3 or better) would allow you to skip the Prep stage, and cast in the minimal time of about 1 minute, and it could last for 15 minutes.  However, a minute still seems a little long compared to how it's described in the books, especially at the end of Turn Coat. 

[Jimmy]

I think in terms of the amulet light spell, it would be one of those low powered minor spells that cost no stress to start, but cost a fate point to overcome a negative aspect (such as Pitch Black). Used in a conflict however I'd enforce the need to make it an evocation. Both these methods can be superceded by the use of a relatively minor thaum spell.