Self-compels vs "just roleplaying"

[WadeL]

I was wondering if folks had good guidelines for where the line between a self-compel and "just roleplaying" is. I have a hard time adjudicating such and knowing when to hand out Fate points or not.

Like, let's say you've got a character with a stereotypical "Smartass" Aspect.

I think clearly if she mouths off at a potential ally and turns them into an enemy because of it, definitely self-compel and she gets a Fate point.

If she mouths off to an enemy who was already going to try and kill her and all that really changes is the enemy focuses fire a bit more on her...that just seems fairly clearly roleplaying, it doesn't really introduce a new problem or consequence. No Fate Point.

But how do you sort of draw the line on the places between? What's a big enough disadvantage to warrant it actually being a compel?

What I'm really having a hard time is articulating what counts as a compel or not to my players in a way that helps them feel confident about when is a good self-compel so they can get more Fate points, and what is just kind of weak("My Hot Temper caused me to take a slightly less than optimal action in combat!").

[Taran]

You don't have to give a FP right away.  In fact, some compels only get paid out after the scene is done.

So, for those grey areas, wait for the scene to play out, then look back and ask yourself (and the player and the table) 'did your good role-playing sufficiently complicate things?'

If the table agrees, then pay the FP.

If a player is asking for a self-compel, you can always say "sure, go for it and we'll see where it goes", then pay it out after the scene is done.

[Sanctaphrax]

There's no real line. I prefer to be generous, though; if there's any kind of meaningful consequence to the action, I'm willing to give a Fate Point for it. And if a player proposes a Compel without much of a consequence, I prefer proposing a way to make it more severe rather than outright rejecting it.

If you ask me, having the Fate Points flow too freely is a lot better than having them not flow freely enough.

[Mr. Death]

I've given fate points for both situations, the latter especially if it's an enemy that has a distinct advantage over the PC (like a magic-immune ogre going after a wizard, a White Court going after someone with a 0 in Discipline, etc). Though personally, I love seeing the look on a player's face when they say something like, "I attack Goon #2," and I just wordlessly slide them a fate point.

Negotiation is always good -- discuss with the players whether some action or another is worth a fate point.

[killking72]

I think it's really fun when you actually get into the character and don't have to rely on compels. Most of the session I've done recently since we've figured out just about everything the character does ends up with us getting fate points on compels, and also general good roleplaying that ends up giving us laughs or complicating things. I think FATE is much better off being free form playing instead of being some FP nazi GM requiring only the GMs compels to get FPs.

[Taran]

I agree with all the comments that err on the side of giving FPs Over withholding. 

[narphoenix]

Though personally, I love seeing the look on a player's face when they say something like, "I attack Goon #2," and I just wordlessly slide them a fate point.

I need to do something like this. Thank you for the wonderful idea.

[Brodie]

It helps to know your players, too. If you can tell when they're really in character (as opposed to just playing the character) and being 'themselves' and their actions sufficiently alter how things turn out, reward them. Also keep in mind that self-compelled Aspects don't have to complicate things to be worth a Fate point. Dresden being a mouthy bastard can actually help his friends when he's using that particular talent to draw attention away from friends. The best Aspects are the ones that can be both negative and positive.

And don't forget to encourage your players to compel each other.