Weapon-value of evocation-projected catch?

[Deadmanwalking]

O.k.  This all makes sense to me. My question now is, if there's no aspect invoked, why does the Fae get a FP.  Is the FP from a compel to have them fight in a bad locale?

It's a Compel from the GM on your High Concept whenever your Catch comes up. This is explicitly stated somewhere, I think, and strongly implied lots of other places.

[Tedronai]

There should be an aspect to represent the presence of the nails, if they're mattering enough to the story to be used in a spell, but I would not require that aspect to be invoked in order to bypass the catch.  The narrative description of the spell serves that purpose sufficiently.  I would likely suggest that the practitioner invoke (/tag) it to add to the spell because iron burns fae and whatnot (though, again, I would not require this).

It's a Compel from the GM on your High Concept whenever your Catch comes up. This is explicitly stated somewhere, I think, and strongly implied lots of other places.

I'm torn on this issue.
The Catch has already been paid for, after all, and thus it seems like 'double-dipping', to me, to be paid in compels for the failure of toughness powers where the Catch is applied.
Running water shorting out a wizard's spellcasting?  Compel.
Fire burning a BCV?  Paid in advance.

[Mr. Death]

There should be an aspect to represent the presence of the nails, if they're mattering enough to the story to be used in a spell, but I would not require that aspect to be invoked in order to bypass the catch.  The narrative description of the spell serves that purpose sufficiently.  I would likely suggest that the practitioner invoke (/tag) it to add to the spell because iron burns fae and whatnot (though, again, I would not require this).

I'd say this makes sense narratively, too. I tend to look at the +2 of a tag as sort of an 'element of surprise' bonus. In this case, when you declare and tag, you're getting that +2 to the roll implicitly because the Fae didn't see it coming. If you use the nails again (without spending a fate point for it), that implicitly means the Fae knows the nails are there and will defend more effectively.

I'm torn on this issue.
The Catch has already been paid for, after all, and thus it seems like 'double-dipping', to me, to be paid in compels for the failure of toughness powers where the Catch is applied.
Running water shorting out a wizard's spellcasting?  Compel.
Fire burning a BCV?  Paid in advance.

Honestly, I'd say it doesn't matter for most NPCs. But I'd say iron qualifies as a compel because it's supposed to be a little beyond just getting through their toughness--they can't even touch it without getting burned.

[Deadmanwalking]

I'm torn on this issue.
The Catch has already been paid for, after all, and thus it seems like 'double-dipping', to me, to be paid in compels for the failure of toughness powers where the Catch is applied.
Running water shorting out a wizard's spellcasting?  Compel.
Fire burning a BCV?  Paid in advance.

Nope! Not the way it works officially anyway. According to the folks at Evil Hat you get a Compel on your High Concept any time your supernatural nature is a problem. They've explicitly said that Lycanthropes get a Compel for every time their powers would be useful but aren't there because it's the wrong time of the month, and that's on top of Human Form [+2], just for example.

[Lavecki121]

There should be an aspect to represent the presence of the nails, if they're mattering enough to the story to be used in a spell, but I would not require that aspect to be invoked in order to bypass the catch.  The narrative description of the spell serves that purpose sufficiently.  I would likely suggest that the practitioner invoke (/tag) it to add to the spell because iron burns fae and whatnot (though, again, I would not require this).

The aspect is a scene aspect that you are putting there with a declaration. Such as "Construction Site" so there are nails there or more directly "Box o Nails".

I'm torn on this issue.
The Catch has already been paid for, after all, and thus it seems like 'double-dipping', to me, to be paid in compels for the failure of toughness powers where the Catch is applied.
Running water shorting out a wizard's spellcasting?  Compel.
Fire burning a BCV?  Paid in advance.

Yea I dont really see how you would get a bonus simply for using a catch. But if you are spending fate points to do it I can see it happening.

[UmbraLux]

On the player's part, it's a declaration, probably using alertness (There are nails here!).  Then the player invokes that (invokes for effect). 

Yep, as noted previously that's one possibility.

Players can't compel.

As mentioned, you can call it an invoke for effect if you prefer.  Less egregious use of jargon is one thing I'm looking forward to out of FATE Core. 

[Taran]

It's a Compel from the GM on your High Concept whenever your Catch comes up. This is explicitly stated somewhere, I think, and strongly implied lots of other places.

I'm torn on this issue.
The Catch has already been paid for, after all, and thus it seems like 'double-dipping', to me, to be paid in compels for the failure of toughness powers where the Catch is applied.
Running water shorting out a wizard's spellcasting?  Compel.
Fire burning a BCV?  Paid in advance.

I think the thing we're getting mixed up with is that a Catch has out of combat complications.  It specifically states under the Catch:

YS pg. 185
Even the mere presence of the
thing that satisfies your Catch will cause
you discomfort (and may be grounds for
a compel or something similar).

So I see these compels as happening in social situations, for instance.  If your catch is silk, but you have to seduce the girl...unfortunately she's wearing a silk bra.  That kind of thing.

I'm not really sure you'd get a FP every time you encounter something in combat that has your catch.  So I'm kind of with the "paid in advance" thing.

If your catch is holy, do you get a FP for pissing off a Knight of the Cross? probably.  But that FP was for pissing him off, not for the fact that he's going to hit you with his holy sword.

[Deadmanwalking]

I'm gonna stick with 'you get FP when bad things happen to you',whether you've gotten some saved Refresh already or not. This post is my basic justification, really (though referring to a different vulnerability than the Catch).

I mean, if another player used a PC's Catch, maybe I wouldn't compel, but every time it comes up from an NPC, that's a conscious GM choice to hurt that character...and that's what compels are for.

I would make an exception for those Catches that got the 'Everything but' rebate ala an Ogre's magic-immunity. You don't get crap when things other than your one protected area come up, that's just silly.