Looking for ideas for 'ranked' aspects, as in not all aspects are equal.

[qlawdat]

So I love the Dresden game.  The more I play it the more I love it.   Something that has been floating around in my head for a while is the idea of ranked aspects.  I ran a one shot for some people who had never played the game before, and the idea that all aspects, mechanically, did the same thing was a bit baffeling to some of them.  And I agree.  Why is tagging the aspect "incense" just as powerful as tagging the "silver inlaid summoning circle" when performing a summoning ritual?    Why does the aspect "focused" has just as much effect on my fireball spell as the aspect "erupting nearby volcano"?   Now I know that for Dresden the answer is "it just does, move on", and I am ok with that for the core game.  But some of my friends would like to use the system for other settings.

I do really like the idea of ranked aspects though.  Some aspects are more powerful than others.  So I was wondering if anyone has any ideas on how to tackle this.   Thanks!

[sinker]

Firstly here is a thread that muses on a similar topic.

http://www.jimbutcheronline.com/bb/index.php/topic,29534.0.html

My worry with that kind of thing is generally that one must ensure that equal effort makes for equal results. How does one establish an aspect of "Erupting nearby volcano"? If it takes almost no effort on the part of the player (like perhaps it's a scene aspect) then it should not be better than an aspect where someone actually had to put effort into it (Like rolling your discipline to establish an aspect of "Focused").

Otherwise you really wind up punishing players who are less creative than others. Normally I'd say encouraging creativity is a good thing, but have you ever been in a game and the GM has demanded that you use your personal social skills in a situation? That nearly always sucks for the socially inept, and in this case it sucks for people who just don't like to think about that part of the game.

[EdgeOfDreams]

The only thing close to this I've ever used is allowing multiple tags on the same aspect in certain situations.

For example, a thief-type character pulls off a big heist.  I might give him a "Loaded with Cash" aspect.  "But," he says, "That's only gonna give me a +2 on a single Resources roll! Surely I stole more than that."  So, I tell him that he has three free tags on that aspect instead of just one, and we keep track of how many times it's been used.  When all the tags are used up, the aspect goes away (or, in the case of the Volcano, starts costing fate points).

This works well when players have earned free tags (due to an awesome maneuver of +6 or more, or pulling off a scheme of some sort), but what to do when you just happen to be near a volcano, and no player has free tags?  Well, you could allow them to invoke the Volcano aspect twice on the same roll, but it should still cost them two fate points.

The problem is, as soon as you let a Fate Point have more or less value depending on what aspect it's invoking, you open up a whole new metagame ripe for abuse and imbalance.  Why would anyone ever spend a Fate Point on an aspect that only grants +1 or +2, when they can search around for a juicy +3 and only tag that.  It also encourages players to make their aspects from maneuvers and declarations as outlandish and impressive as possible, in hopes of getting a better tag, even if the aspect doesn't totally make sense within the scene.

[wyvern]

First, aspects like "focused" and "incense" are boring.  Not very good aspects.  Though they can still have some amusing results - "Yeah," GM holds up a fate point, "you're so focused on casting that fireball that you don't notice the ghoul sneaking up behind you with a lead pipe..."
(Or incense could set off the apartment's fire alarm, or etc.  Don't do this sort of thing all the time, of course, but adding a compel on someone's maneuver can be grand fun on occasion.)

Second, sometimes things need more than one aspect.  For example, instead of "erupting nearby volcano", I'd have aspects of "nearby volcano", "unearthly heat", and "cloud of ash", and possibly also "lava flows" and "poisonous fumes" if the volcano is particularly close.

[devonapple]

I don't believe that making some Aspects grant more than a +2 bonus would work out. Especially when one considers the possibility of simply establishing more Aspects.

Where the Aspect Quality becomes a potential factor is when it is cashed in for Plot Impact (an Invoke for Effect).

Another possible venue for Aspect Quality comes up when using the FATE Fractal to simulate a particular micro- or macro-system within the game in order to enhance the narrative. Poison, for example, could simply cause X Stress across Y duration, or it could be built as its own FATE micro-system, with its own Aspects, skills, and stress tracks, and treating it would be a direct conflict between the medic and the "character" created to simulate the Poison. But that's a niche situation, and anyone playing with the FATE Fractal is likely not going to need to tie such micro/macrossystems to the Quality of the originating Aspect. But that was my way of potentially bridging into FATE Fractals.

Second, sometimes things need more than one aspect.  For example, instead of "erupting nearby volcano", I'd have aspects of "nearby volcano", "unearthly heat", and "cloud of ash", and possibly also "lava flows" and "poisonous fumes" if the volcano is particularly close.

Seconded!

[Tallyrand]

One thing that I would say is that you should remember that Aspects don't only give +2s for effect, and the more dramatic an Aspect is the easier it is to come up with ways you can Invoke for Effect.  For example, yeah your Silver Summoning Circle when invoked for a bonus on a thaumaturgical ritual would give the same +2 as the incense I would also allow someone Invoke for effect to state that it represented an unbreakable barrier for whatever was summoned with it.  When using it for an attack roll Focused is the same as Nearby Erupting Volcano but a clever wizard could Invoke for Effect to to say that the primal fire shatters the defensive powers on the target allowing it to ignore Armor and Toughness powers. 

I think too many people see Aspects as sources for +2s, while that's easy and that's even how I tend to use them, their real power comes from Declarations and Invoking for Effect and in those cases what the aspect is is VERY important.

[devonapple]

I think too many people see Aspects as sources for +2s, while that's easy and that's even how I tend to use them, their real power comes from Declarations and Invoking for Effect and in those cases what the aspect is is VERY important.

Which comes back to the question: does the GM charge the player a premium for more robust Aspects and make them harder to establish (and if the player squanders it on a +2, that's his prerogative to have cheated himself of a free use of the Aspect's Invoke-for-Effect potential)? Or is the Aspect its own enforcer, obligating players to choose to create Aspects with as much narrative application as possible?

[ways and means]

There does seem a bit of an imbalance in the power of possible compels for effect, for instant creating the 'confused' aspect (possibly via flash bangs, illusions, or inciting the right emotion) on a troll then invoking it to get said troll to flatten one of its team mates is far more useful than tagging a bleeding consequence (well unless your going to use it as an excuse from some sort of grim blood magic). Then again the same aspect and invocation on a weaker opponent or one with fate point won't achieve any where near the same result.

[Tallyrand]

Which comes back to the question: does the GM charge the player a premium for more robust Aspects and make them harder to establish (and if the player squanders it on a +2, that's his prerogative to have cheated himself of a free use of the Aspect's Invoke-for-Effect potential)? Or is the Aspect its own enforcer, obligating players to choose to create Aspects with as much narrative application as possible?

No, I set difficulties for setting up Aspects based on how I perceive their likelihood of being available.  For example, I would never allow my players to establish Erupting Volcano as an aspect because it's not something that I would forget to mention, either it's there or it's not.  In a city street  something like Manhole Cover or Parked Car would be very easy to establish, I may not even require a roll but an aspect of Boulder would be substantially harder.