I don't have any particular problem with the Magic rules, but I wanted to try streamlining them a little bit.  I've found that I was trying to keep track of too many things: How much mental stress can I afford? How strong an attack can a pull off? etc.  In other words, I was getting bogged down in the mechanics, when I wanted to be focusing on the story.

There are more details below, but the basic rules are:

• All magical actions cost one Mental Stress
• Evocation: Roll Discipline + Focus Item
• Thaumatrugy: Roll Lore + Focus Item
• Spell Strength: Conviction + Specialization
• Reduce Strength by 1 for each Exchange added
• Reduce Strength by 2 for each Zone affected

I'm interested in any suggestions people have, as well as whether or not I'm introducing any big problems with these rules.

A block against "Spell Strength" seems a bit like a Threshhold used as a suppressor (YS230), although I don't think you should be able to do something like that without serious thaumaturgy. Something like Harry did to Kravos comes to mind.

That's a good point.  An active Block against Spell Strength should probably require thaumaturgy.  Which is actually cool, because it gives another good option for "Thaumaturgy at the speed of Evocation".

Pepper to the face can be an effective deterrent.
Also, break open the fire hydrants.

Baseball bat to the head

Could you drain away the energies as the wizard tries to build them- I mean the stories suggest that is the effect the running water has.

Sure, I can think of lots of ways to describe the Block.  I'm just trying to work out how it would work mechanically.

There are example in the books where a wizard can't cast magic because either (a) another magic user is blocking them, or (b) they are too distracted to focus.  Considering how hugely powerful wizards are, that seems like a pretty useful strategy to use against them.  So how would you run it?

The Intent: The intent is to block an enemy magic user from casting spells at you.  Or, alternately, to weaken the spells that the magic user casts.  Then the rest of your buddies can go beat them up, without fear of being burned alive.

The Mechanics:
- Most "shield" spells and defensive rolls are treated as a Block against the targeting aspect of the Discipline roll.
- Could you create a block against the control aspect of the Discipline roll?  Could a +5 Block vs. Control require a wizard to roll +6 shifts just to control a Weapon: 1 Evocation attack?
- Since there is only one Discipline roll, could you create a block that both weakens the control roll and weakens the targeting roll?
- Could you create a block against "Spell Strength"?  Could a +5 Block vs. Spellslinging weaken a Weapon:6 Attack spell or a Block:6 Shield Spell to just Weapon:1 or Block:1?

What skills would be required for these Blocks?  Would you require a spell to shut down another spell?  Could you do it with a Fists roll (to keep the magic user from focusing)?  Could you do it with a Rapport/Deceit/Presence roll (to distract the magic user)?

Vertigo Wave is, IMO, better represented by Maneuvers and attacks.  An attack the created the effects of drunkenness would be an attack against the Mental or perhaps Social track.  Otherwise could also be represented by Maneuvers more easily than as an attack.

You've stated that before in this thread, but I agree.  Maneuvers are a perfectly decent way to represent it, but not necessarily "better".  Maneuvers generally inflict short term effects, while attacks inflict longer lasting consequences which can't be removed by a counter-maneuver.  The intent of the attack is not to merely put the enemy "off balance" so we can hit them with another attack - it's to make them unable to physically function (i.e. to be Taken Out).

Drunkenness is a physical condition, generally opposed by Endurance.  I don't understand why you think it would attack the Mental track, and the consequences described were clearly Physical, not Social.  Also note that it's only recreating the physical effects, not the alcohol itself (although I admit I don't know what part of alcohol poisoning actually kills you - is it the alcohol or the endorphins?)

In so far as the 'Light Saber' attack it's not well represented by DFRPG at all, I'd place that as more of a weakness of the system than a weakness of my argument.  Really the only thing you can do with a Light Saber is either kill or inflict Severe or Extreme consequences, we never see anyone 'nicked' in a light saber battle and it seems to me that that is for a reason.

Vader arguably got "nicked" on his side during ROTJ (let me do a little Googling... http://www.thedentedhelmet.com/f22/vaders-armor-vs-lukes-lightsaber-37522/).  And just because we don't see it doesn't mean that a light saber couldn't "nick" someone.  Why do you think the Light Saber attack isn't well represented by the system?  What about my description doesn't fit the system?  How is it different from, say, a Warden Sword or a Sword of the Cross?

"If you could ask your players to change something (characters, playstyle, etc.) what would you ask them?  Can that advice be made generic for all players and GM's?"

Hmm... I'd reinforce that for whatever reason, the CHARACTERS should have strong trusting relationships, and I'd ask for more work on the background/aspects to support this and more roleplaying of it. The truth is though, mostly that doesn't come up. I'm blessed with some really good role players as players, and the less experienced folks are willing to learn/explore, which is nice.

Dian

That's interesting advice.  How does that help Aspects to be compelled (or storyline to advance)?  Wouldn't some antagonism between characters (not players) make Compels easier?

There are definitely some older casinos off the strip that fit that bill. Only issue is that they tend to see less people. Which is not to say no people, just there are times when there are only a handful of people in the building.

I was thinking of that as a feature, rather than a bug.  I would imagine the supernatural community would prefer a place where the clued in could gather and talk without the normal, mundane world thinking they were crazy.

It also makes dramatic entrances easier, since everyone will take notice when you come in the door.

I guess what I was trying to say is "Ask Your GM What You Can Do For Your GM", but that isn't really helpful to the topic so I'll stop.

Heh.  Let me turn the question back around to you.  If you were the GM, what would you want from your players?

As an extreme example, let's say you wanted to run Dresden Files so that you could build a city full of intrigue, social interaction, and high moral stakes.  Then your players all built a bunch of combat monsters with Aspects like "Shoot First, Ask Questions Never".  You would want to sit down and talk to your players, right?  What would you ask them?

One of the things about DFRPG is that the players stories are just as valid as the GM's. You can create those complications on your own, without relying on the GM (Although getting a nod from him/her initially isn't a bad idea). You can invent people and places wholesale if the GM is willing. You can be a GM as well as a player if you want, and that might help with compels.

That can be true, but it isn't necessary true.  As you say, the GM has to be willing.  In my case, the GM isn't quite comfortable yet with that level of story improvisation.  He plans a ton of stuff in advance, so if tried to introduce too many sub and/or side plots it would just end up hijacking whatever story he wanted to tell in the first place.

So...

• You're the GM.
• You have a cool, investigation-style story to tell - picture CSI, NCIS, the first half of every Law and Order, etc.
• You want to get all the characters involved, but since the plot lines all revolve around crime and investigation, it's the local cop character that ends up driving most of the story (and getting most of the compels).
• You could change your plot or your storytelling style, but you were really interested in telling that story.

If you could ask your players to change something (characters, playstyle, etc.) what would you ask them?  Can that advice be made generic for all players and GM's?