How should being 'taken down' from spellcasting stress be interpreted?

[Melendwyr]

When a character is taken out by stress, their opponent decides what the consequences of this will be, moderated by the implied context of the contest.  Seems reasonable enough - a truly unfriendly combat could end with the character dying, while a relatively restrained arm-wrestling conflict might result in bragging rights but no lasting physical consequences.

So how should the mental stress associated with spellcasting be interpreted?  There's no opponent character involved, so no character-desire context.  It's just the GM's opinion.  Which wouldn't be so bad, except... The book describes mental consequences as extremely severe.  I suspect they're talking about the worst possible cases, rather like dying is the worst possible outcome of a physical struggle.

The player can't concede as an action - there's no struggle, and therefore no action other than their own that would push their stress over the limit.  So what happens if someone goes over their own mental limit?

[Haru]

Well, they are taken out of the conflict. Regardless of who did it, there is a winner of the conflict, and that's their opponent, so he can dictate what happens.

It makes sense in context as well. Harry describes casting too much as being very straining and he's constantly at the verge of collapsing from casting too many spells. So being taken out by your own casting stress will mostly be toppling over because you've drained your body of the energy it needs to function to stay alert. You don't have to take any consequences when you are taken out. Quite the contrary, you take consequences to not be taken out.

If you've got allies in the conflict, and they win the conflict, nothing bad will happen to you. They won the scene and so they get to dictate what happens next. You don't have to decide on a taken out result any time a character is taken out, that can happen at the end of the scene, to determine how the story continues.

[Melendwyr]

Well, they are taken out of the conflict. Regardless of who did it, there is a winner of the conflict, and that's their opponent, so he can dictate what happens.

  There doesn't need to be any conflict.  A wizard all by their lonesome in an empty room can cast enough spells to overflow his stress boxes.  Nor does there need to be an opponent.

It makes perfect sense that when there's an opponent, and they inflict the stress, they decide what the result is.  When the character is inflicting the stress on themselves... do they decide?

[Mr. Death]

I'd say in that case the GM decides, and it should be something linked to how the spellcasting went, if possible. Or, more generically, they burn themselves out on magic for a while, kind of like Harry did in Fool Moon.

[Haru]

A wizard sitting alone in a room with no rush is hardly an interesting scene. Which means that being taken out is just as meaningless. I would probably just see if the spell succeeds, and then move on depending on the outcome.

[Taran]

  There doesn't need to be any conflict.  A wizard all by their lonesome in an empty room can cast enough spells to overflow his stress boxes.  Nor does there need to be an opponent.

It makes perfect sense that when there's an opponent, and they inflict the stress, they decide what the result is.  When the character is inflicting the stress on themselves... do they decide?

While I agree that this doesn't make an interesting scene, it's also one of the ways to do rituals, especially transformation-type spells.

You cast a spell with enough shifts to 'take yourself out'.  Then you decide the take-out results.  Usually, it involves growing wings...or claws...or turning in to a giant bear.

Edit:  In a combat where a spellcaster takes themselves out with their own spell, I might treat it as a concession.  They've taken themselves out of the fight and 'x' bad stuff happens to them but they are effectively out of the fight for the duration of the combat.  Part of the concession would include something in case the enemy wins the conflict.

[Melendwyr]

Let's say we have Harry sitting in an empty white room... with the Giant Jar of Pickles.  Harry's really craving a pickle, but the lid is stuck beyond the power of mortal muscle power to budge.  Harry summons up his will and begins casting powerful but subtle force effects to twist off the obstacle to sour salty goodness.

If he keeps the spellcasting up, he will eventually be taken out, no matter how many consequences he takes.  What sort of 'taken out' result would be appropriate in this admittedly rather silly scenario?

The jar of pickles has no interests or preferences.  Yeah, the GM certainly does... but there's no context to guide the probable outcome.  If he burns out his ability to use magic for a while... how long should that last?

[Taran]

He goes unconscious and wakes up hours later with the pickles staring at him with an air of victory upon its label.  The pickles inside swirling with the residual magical energies, taunting him.

The goal was to open the bottle.  He failed.

The consequences should match the importance of the contest.  In this scenario, I'd say that not much would happen.  It would be silly to take consequences at all, so he'd do a huge spell, fail, get taken out and choose not to take consequences.

The GM and the player would decide the best take-out result for the scenario.  Probably, they'd agree that he'd have a head-ache and then he'd break the jar open by smashing it on the ground.

If he needed to open the jar before a horde of Outsiders came crashing in, I'd say the take out should fit the scenario so, maybe,  he'd remain unconscious until the outsiders were breaking in, wrecking havoc.

And then the real conflict would begin.

[solbergb]

Does Harry get fate points for failing to open the pickle jar?

(for me the answer is "yes, if the entire conflict was entertaining to the players+gm")