Are all Aspects made equal?

[tzizimine]

Hello all,

I have been lurking on the board for the past few months, in preparation for a Dresdenverse Boston game this spring and I had a question.

Background: My group is mostly D&D (3.5) / Pathfinder based and we have been gaming for several years together, so getting through crunch of a particular system is not hard. We have dabbled (and enjoyed) Old WoD - Vampire, NWoD, Shadowrun and Star Wars d20. So my players are very creative, but they do come for a mechanic-driven mindset. So one of them asked me...

"Are all these aspects made equal?"

To which, I didn't have a good answer. Mechanic-wise, it appears yes, and the question of 'how often it comes up?' and 'when it can be used?' are known variables that we don't need to take into account for this discussion. But, assuming that each aspect you can think of applies in the here and now, are they all equally potent to die rolls, fate points and other game mechanics?

If so, how do you deal with aspects that _seem_ like they should be more important (like SPRAINED ANKLE vs. BROKEN ANKLE)

If not, how do you determine which are more potent and by how much?

[Oblyss]

I'd say there's a clear difference between Sprained and Broken aspect-wise, as one would be connected to a mild consequence, and the other to a moderate. (May be mixing up the exact levels but the difference is clear)

And then because of the severity difference it would be a lot easier to compel the broken aspect, on top of it lasting longer than the sprained one.

And for more character type aspects, I'd say no they aren't all equal. One aspect might be worded in such a way no one ever figures out how to use/compel it, or it just has such a short scope of use that it almost never gets used.

[Deadmanwalking]

Aspects are indeed not made equal. On characters, an Aspect that you can use for just about anything and can be compelled regularly is just better than one that almost never comes up either way.

And a sprained and broken ankle are probably on-par in terms of actual combat use...but the broken one is likely a Severe Consequence to the Sprained's Mild or Moderate, making it take a lot longer to heal. If you really think it's more important, well, Compel it more often. That's the real measure of a negative Aspect's importance and effect, after all.

All this encourages thinking narratively by even the most rules-focused player, at least, IMO, since it's how relevant something is narratively ie: how often it provides real bonuses or causes problems, that determines its' importance and power.

[tzizimine]

So, if I'm understanding it right, the issue of severity that I'm concerned with is a matter of 'duration'.

Short term aspects would be things that would be applied as maneuvers.
Injury based ones would be based on the appropriate Consequence slot.
Ones that from characters / locations are permanent.

But, using a scene specific / zone specific aspect (like ON FIRE vs. SMOKE-FILLED ROOM) would only be different in what it could effect, since both are only going to last for as long as this scene.

Sounds like experienced GM's use situations where aspects 'stack'... like a SMOKE-FILLED ROOM and ON FIRE combine to either 2 compels or a +4 die bonus?

[Oblyss]

So, if I'm understanding it right, the issue of severity that I'm concerned with is a matter of 'duration'.

Short term aspects would be things that would be applied as maneuvers.
Injury based ones would be based on the appropriate Consequence slot.
Ones that from characters / locations are permanent.

But, using a scene specific / zone specific aspect (like ON FIRE vs. SMOKE-FILLED ROOM) would only be different in what it could effect, since both are only going to last for as long as this scene.

Sounds like experienced GM's use situations where aspects 'stack'... like a SMOKE-FILLED ROOM and ON FIRE combine to either 2 compels or a +4 die bonus?

I'd say the severity is both duration and how open the aspect is for compel. If it's an aspect that can be compelled against you with just about everything you do, that's different than one of equal standing that only gets compelled at certain times.

Let's say you have two moderate consequences. HURT LEG and CONCUSSION. The hurt leg might only get compelled when you go to run or stand, where as the Concussion might get compelled from trying to stand... trying to see... trying to reason a situation out.

So even if they are both moderate consequences one is definitely worse than the other.

Sounds like experienced GM's use situations where aspects 'stack'... like a SMOKE-FILLED ROOM and ON FIRE combine to either 2 compels or a +4 die bonus?

Yeah pretty much, players can do this too. I've stacked multiple aspects to get one spell off, along with tagging scene aspects getting up to +6 and such.

[Deadmanwalking]

Yeah. A mechanically ideal combat round of five PCs vs one enemy in DFRPG usually consists of everyone except the hardest hitter making Maneuvers or Assessments and maybe Declarations, then passing all their tags to the heavy hitter. That can easily be 4-8 Aspects on a single attack.

The same is true of minions teaming up on PCs. Aspect stacking is powerful and dangerous in Fate.

[Oblyss]

Yeah. A mechanically ideal combat round of five PCs vs one enemy in DFRPG usually consists of everyone except the hardest hitter making Maneuvers or Assessments and maybe Declarations, then passing all their tags to the heavy hitter. That can easily be 4-8 Aspects on a single attack.

The same is true of minions teaming up on PCs. Aspect stacking is powerful and dangerous in Fate.

Huh I didn't know about that combat tactic, I've only messed with maneuvers a little bit so far. That can lead to some crazy shift spells.

[Deadmanwalking]

I said 'mechanically ideal' not 'often occurring'. 

I've actually only seen it done a few times...but they were scary and impressive.

[tzizimine]

Cool...

Are there situations where the aspects themselves do stress? Like a building ON FIRE causing physical stress?

[Deadmanwalking]

Cool...

Are there situations where the aspects themselves do stress? Like a building ON FIRE causing physical stress?

Not inherently by the rules, no. There are rules for environmental damage like from a fire (see p. 325), but they don't technically interact with the Aspect rules at all. Though, obviously, most sane GMs will have people eventually start taking damage if the building's on fire.

[tzizimine]

Deadmanwalking, thanks a bunch...

I will have to re-read that section again.

As a side note, is it normal for crunch-heavy GMs and Players to get the feeling that we're over-thinking this system? Seems to happen every time I open the book.

[Deadmanwalking]

You're very welcome. 

And that's a normal experience, yes.

I dunno if it's an accurate statement, though. The system really does have a fair amount of crunch to it, some concealed enough that you need to really think about it.

[tzizimine]

True, but compared to Shadowrun 1st Ed (and 2nd, 3rd and 4th) or Rolemaster, this is as crunchy as yogurt. (Crunchy being burdened by game mechanics... I wouldn't know about trying to actually eat the book)

[Dougansf]

True, but compared to Shadowrun 1st Ed (and 2nd, 3rd and 4th) or Rolemaster, this is as crunchy as yogurt. (Crunchy being burdened by game mechanics... I wouldn't know about trying to actually eat the book)

I've been playing Rolemaster for a long time, and I couldn't agree more. 

However, from what I've been hearing recently, Dresden and Diaspora are the crunchiest Fate games out there.

Aspects have been tricky to get my head around.  One statement that helped is knowing that they are "narrative truths" for as long as they exist.  They can be invoked or compelled, but they still exist and affect the world even without those mechanics being used.

Then you have to resist the urge to give everything an Aspect (called Aspect Bloat), and limit it to just things that matter to the scene.

[Tedronai]

Things that matter are (or have) aspects.  Aspects are (or describe) things that matter.
When an aspect is used, it has precisely the same weight so far as the mechanics of the game are concerned, as compared to any other aspect.
A 'Shattered Skull' does not provide a larger bonus (or penalty, or other complication or benefit) than a 'Sprained Ankle' to any given application, but it is likely to provide that bonus more frequently (ie. is easier to justify invoking/compelling).