Rote Spells & tagging...

[jait]

So... I'm a new GM.   Wondering about something I read about rote spells...  

YS 257:
A rote spell... has the same power level, places the exact same aspect, etc. Any change in the parameters of the spell disqualifies it from being a rote.

This is cool.  I get this.  

A caster with Conviction 3, Discipline 2 casting a 3-shift attack spell will consistently pay 2-stress and suffer 1-shift of backlash or fallout.  

But then there's this:

YS 258:
Aspect invocations and other such trickery may be used after the fact, just as if you had rolled a zero and then wanted to invoke something.

So, I must have the same aspects or it isn't a rote spell, but I can add aspects after the fact?  What constitutes after the fact?  Can someone give me an example here?

Hey, I've been up for 30 hours or so...  Not everything is making perfect sense right now...  Any help would be appreciated.

[jait]

Okay, yeah... lack of sleep.  I got it.  And I'm an idiot to boot.

YS257 was saying that if there's an aspect on it, that aspect must always be applied.

YS258 was saying that you could add in aspects to increase the control, and presumably, thepotential damage of an attack-rote.

[Becq]

Not quite.

Firstly, in your example, the character only has a one shift control deficit.  This means the spell costs the standard one mental stress to cast (it's equal his conviction), but he'll default to suffering from his choice of 1 point of backlash or fallout, because he counts as having missed his roll by one.  However, you always have the option of spending Fate to invoke an aspect on your control roll, which in your example would bump the imaginary roll over what was needed to control the spell, therefore you would not suffer backlash/fallout.  This is noted on YS258:

"Finally, keep in mind that you can have a rote that’s more powerful than you can control with a Discipline roll of zero, which would basically cause automatic fallout or backlash when used unless you can invoke some aspects to make up the difference."

Note that you are still making a Discipline roll to target the spell, which affects damage, and your Fate point would still increase the targeting part of the roll, too (just like it would if you weren't using a rote).

[Michael Sandy]

A friend created a character with a Flash Freeze rote spell.  It is a rote spell that requires the aspect "soaking wet" on the target.

So he can't freeze somebody without them being soaked first.

You could have a fire mage who has a rote to put a maneuver "on fire" on the target, and then has a Fan the Flames rote spell, that requires the "on fire" aspect to cast.

You could have an earth mage who has 2 rotes, one to grab an opponent, and the next to squeeze them, which would require the aspect "trapped by the earth".

[Michael Sandy]

By the book, you could have a water (or wood) spell that requires a nearby tree to animate.  And you could have it as a rote spell, which would mean you could only cast the rote spell when there was a nearby tree to animate.