Can two Changelings have a Changeling kid or would it be a human?  That'd be an interesting twist... and does that mean they are more human or more fae?

Ok, here it is.

Me: How do you run sponsored magic users when it comes to lawbreaking? Since it's not their magic does it still taint them somehow?

Fred: Lawbreaking is still a cost of casting certain kinds of nature-violating magic. (But maybe the sponsor would be willing to shoulder that cost in exchange for some particularly vicious debt.)

I think you've said something like this in the past. Can you be a little more specific as to what you mean by that? Are you saying that you might simply ignore the event in exchange for debt, or is there a way of mechanically representing this (like the temporary powers rules or something)?

I mean the player wouldn't take the stunt at all, nor get its benefits, but its sponsor would absorb the 'hit' and consider the player to be constantly in at least 1-2 points of debt each session (since that lines up with the cost of the stunt).

Also can pure mortals pick up the Lawbreaker (seventh) power from the wrong knowledge?

I probably wouldn't play it that way, but as you've guessed, that's a taste thing.

Does it work any differently since they don't have magic, or is it kinda wasted refresh?

It'd be wasted; doubtful they could do something with it; but I see this as more a plot device thing revolving around someone unleashing a [whatever] after reading the wrong book. But Lawbreaker usually implies that the owner of said stunt is some kind of practitioner, since all implementations affect the casting of spells, not general everyday activities.

Is there any situation where you feel that dealing mental stress with magic is ok (non-lawbreaking)? An example that keeps cropping up is that of the sleep or stun spell. Would you even consider that mental stress or would you run that as physical stress?

I'd consider it more than a little boring is what. I mean, really, those sorts of spells are pretty deprotagonizing when shot at the PCs and are essentially "put this target completely at my mercy" (so I can slit his throat or whatever) spells when PCs use them on NPCs. Which is pretty much the definition of a "taken out" result. Working towards that via whatever stress track is fine, I imagine -- your "sleep" or "stun" spell isn't really going to be producing a result that adds up to psychological trauma. Mental stress isn't an inherent violation. Invading someone's mind is.

Another question that came up while we were talking about this was if a mortal takes domination (or a similar power) to represent a focused and refined spell (like the Alphas' transformation) would they take lawbreaking powers or do we go with "such powers are already assumed to have assessed the costs for holding such sway over another's mind."(YS241)

Yeah, that's a little tricky, since it's all in the "soft" details rather than firmly in the system details. The rationale. I'd consider doing the Lawbreaker stunt there because the rationale says this is mortal magic rather than a "creature power".

Magic maneuvers. Do they have a duration based on the spell, or whether or not they are sticky? In other words if I maneuver is the aspect going to stick around for a number of exchanges equal to the shifts I devoted to duration, or is it going to stick around for the scene or until someone does something about it?

I'd probably treat them as a scene thing. Maneuvers are so lightweight, really. Persistence primarily matters with things like blocks and such. But I have a feeling I'm breaking the rules if I say it's so (I didn't write them).

Another question is what the book is talking about when it refers to "objects that store power" for evocation. It's fairly clear on what it's talking about thematically (relics, etc) but how would you run that mechanically? Is that a plot device kind of thing or is there a specific method that one could use?

I'd start by thinking about it in terms of ritual componentry, which is largely about objects-which-are-aspects.

Do you allow aspects to influence your evocation power? As I currently understand, aspects help with a roll, which doesn't happen for power, but it seems a little odd that a source of power would help with control.

An invoked aspect is a +2, right? Apply it to anything appropriate that has a numerical rating.

Finally transformation ritual on a willing target. Do you have to still have enough shifts of power to overcome all of their consequences, or could they technically choose not to take those consequences in which case you would only have to overcome the stress track?

One might suggest that this is a concession scenario.

I have to ask for a little more clarification on this one for two reasons. Firstly this is a huge one on the boards. No one seems to be able to come to a consensus on shifts necessary to transform a willing target. Secondly knowing what needs to be overcome is important for determining shifts. If we use the concession scenario, then do we simply need enough shifts to pay for the transformation effect itself without dealing any stress to the target?

No, concessions are done only in the face of stress. You'd have to deal enough stress to exceed the target's stress track for it to make sense for concessions to come into play. So that's your minimum.

This confuses me a bit. If you deal enough stress to exceed their stress track, then aren't they just taken out at that point, no concessions necessary?

That's the point at which they're:

- Taking a consequence and staying in the fight, or
- Conceding (though they could take a consequence), or
- Taken out (because they cannot take a consequence)