That's fine--at that point it's not fundamentally very different from how Ebenezeer was shutting down other magic.  And I'm not saying you shouldn't do it, just that to do it right it should be treated with the gravity it deserves.  I mean, hey, it's a game--a collaborative storytelling game at that. If you guys have fun with it, have fun with it.

Eh, my bad, thought AS required feeding dependency and I didn't double check. Thanks for pointing that out.

Having chewed on it (and discussed it with my wife, since she's apparently less bothered by the whole concept) I suppose the problem that grabbed me wasn't that you wanted to cause mental stress in and of itself, but that it also coincided with removing a Wizard's magic, possibly long term, which is a pretty nasty breaker. Causing mental stress or backlash actually doesn't bother me much, so I'm more or less okay with that.   I mean, a Psychic attack on a Wizard pretty much does that already. I'm not exactly terribly opposed to the idea, as long as it is A). Not all that simple to shut down everyone with any kind of magic and B). Not something that can easily (keyword here) just *ruin* magical being's entire week. You wanna shut a Wizard down with some kind of weird magical psychic attack? Be my guest. (Although it's 4th law breaking territory and magical attempts to do so are, as far as I'd be concerned, identical, since you are attempting to essentially block or cut off who they are).

Regarding Consequences though you should leave some wiggle room: It doesn't have to be 'Can't cast Magic' (and shouldn't be unless it's a taken out result at least), but 'Misfiring Magic' 'Disrupted' Or SOMETHING like that. I mean, assuming you use this on a PC, it's really cruel for a GM to basically turn a Wizard PC into a glorified Mortal for a long period.  If that was the goal I'd be firmly against allowing it as a GM, but you wanna have some kind of weird magicky attack that makes magic harder?  Okay, I guess. Just know that comes with baggage (being 4th-law territory and basically being a horrifying thought to Wizards anyway as a Magical talent folk, for example. Also, if it's evo based, there's ways to shut it down--which actually serves to balance it somewhat, I suspect).

Agreed.  It's a little more involved (though I think technically Fae in her series have free will and are not so tied to their nature--though that may be because the Queens are AWOL in that series), but she does a good job showcasing the various kinds and can be cribbed pretty safely for Dresden verse, I'd think.

So, according to Our World and the DV in general, Fae have a lot of reasons for hanging out in the mortal world: Reasons as trivial as boredom (Real boredom, the kind of mind bending, nothing ever changes-in-the-Nevernever) kind of way, a desire for more earthly pursuits to direct needs in the mortal world (Leanansidhe drinks human blood from artists and poets in exchange for inspiration for them, drawing power from it).  Humans are influences into the mortal world, a way for the Fae to amass more influence ('Oh, you want the city to bulldoze this park that happens to have ties to the Summer Court? Why, it just so happens I have this congressman in my debt... ') and a certain cachet. (If you're responsible for bringing in a Changeling who goes on to do something significant, that reflects well on you, which amasses power in the Sidhe world figuratively and literally)    Lastly, the fastest way for either court to replenish or increase their ranks (and power as a result) is Changelings.  That alone explains why both courts are inevitably very interested in anyone who's a Changeling.  Depending on the Changeling's progeny, it could be VERY interesting.   

The easiest way to get 'Mom' to leave them alone is straightforward: She owes the benefactor a favor (binding in the Faerie world). Alternatively, the benefactor owes the mother a favor--and if that's the case her leaving the child alone is a part of that.  Generally speaking, with Fae plots, go complicated and convoluted: It just isn't all that fun for them if it isn't confusing and contradictory.

The obvious example of a kind of daisy chain of 'Why do they get so involved in Mortal affairs anyway?' Margaret runs into Lea somehow, manages to get a favor owed to her (Can't wait to hear that one!) That favor means looking 'after' Harry (and in typical Fae fashion she has a REALLLLLLLY funny idea of what that means).  Lea's queen finds out about it, and finds a way to possibly earn favors and influence over a pivotal Wizard with some powerful connections and enough raw power to make a potent ally or servant.  Because SHE's involved, Summer has to get involved, largely to stop that because there's no way in hell Winter gets an asset that powerful--but nobody gets to move openly. 

And yes, it can all boil down to something as simple as care for her child. Though to make the story more interesting, it should be an alien thing, barely understood by the Fae mother in question--and turn out as well as a five year old who Reallllly loves her pet hamster (and very probably ends up accidentally squishing it).

The main reason for looking into playing a true or pure fae was to beable to have a Pc with greater glamor. the rules i have say you must be pure fae to have this power. which suchs mainly the power looks fun but does not really look to over the top on power scale.

I'd ask your GM to make an exception before I'd ask to play  Pure Fae.  You're paying for either a lot more limitations or stretching the definition of a Pure Fae for an ability that is really trickier. (Alternatively, you could just ask for a more limited custom version of Greater Glamours, since the ability technically lets you make nearly anything--unless you want to summon motor vehicles (or horse and carriages if you're feeling classical, I guess).  In some ways playing a Pure Fae would be pretty limiting and fairly complicated to pull off 'well'.  But yeah--RAW, you can't.  If you want to, or want something like it, talk to your GM. 

One particularly dirty house-rule that could be applied is sort of turning it into a magical/spiritual 'grapple' for all intents and purposes using a different stat line.  I'm going to throw down my own 2 cents though and say long term (anything longer than a scene) is no.  That's not only a powerful enough effect that you'd get way too noticed. (Think of a Warden with that ability--or a Fae, or pretty much anything that has to shut down Wizards), but it's so powerful it sort of creeps into upsetting balance of power.  Not sure I like that much. Generally speaking the only thing that seems to get between a Wizard and his power is himself, and I'd be wary of changing that. Aspect tagging would work, I guess--but talk about a nasty aspect.  I'd at least require a lot of shifts to make that last (Enough shifts to safely cancel out all spellcasting attempts + duration + overcoming his resistance to the effect in the first place). *Maybe* a Thamaturgy style ability. Narratively you could see it as an elaborate ritual (presumeably he'd be unconscious at the time, which would put a fun time constraint on it).  Quick and dirty evocation though would be just no. That's the downside of using Evo anyway.

Can I ask, out of curiousity, what the intent is in wanting to play a True Fae instead of say, a Changeling? Is it just because you want to play in the Sandbox of Greater Glamours or is there something specific you're going for?

Good question to have an answer to anyway depending on the GM you'd play with. Personally I'd be a little leery of it, if only because I've had one too many groups with a player who really only gained enjoyment out of making the group miserable and constantly backstabbing them.