Maybe it's just semantics, but would the wording "make a roll to create or gain access to an aspect" be important? When taking a consequence to super charge a spell you never actually roll anything to create said consequence, possibly implying "no roll = no free tag".
Um, yeah. I was just saying that.
It would have to be 'make a roll or spend a FP to discover or create an aspect' so as to account for declarations.
You could argue that there's no tag on FP Declarations, actually.
I wouldn't, personally, but you could make that argument.
I'll have to check the rulebook, because I was fairly sure the use of the term "navel gazing" meant that it was basically a no-difficulty, if it makes sense go ahead, type of maneuver.
There is still a roll. Page 207 is clear on that, though it does mention that the roll is likely to be easy.
I could by that, even if one is jumping to stress tracks - I could also see some GM's wanting a roll involved if it's power drawn from the physical stress track or tags as a result of consequence.
That would be a houserule and not a very well-thought-out one.
The rules are pretty clear on how you fuel spells with consequences. There's no rolling involved, and there's no good reason to get rolling involved.
