Smart Spellcasting and Tags

[blues.soldier]

Question answered. I love the system's flexibility in that there are so many ways to achieve similar results.

[MWKilduff]

Question answered. I love the system's flexibility in that there are so many ways to achieve similar results.

I was more looking for ideas that allowed me to come up with some more fun combos.  I am familiar with the use of aspects, so that is not a concern.  I am looking for opinions and suggestions for spells that can cause tags, or your spell and magic item combos would be appreciated.

[MWKilduff]

Your average Weapon: 4 attack using water magic is likely raw entropy, since actual water isn't likel to make good direct attacks. Perhaps more importantly, you can't just add Aspects to someone with an attack unless you have some specific effect saying so.

Actually water naturally is the most destructive force on the planet.  Water at high pressure can knock down walls or cut through stone like a saw.  I was thinking something along the lines of a high pressure stream of water for the Watery Blast Ring.  After being hit with any kind of attack there may be an aspect that you could invoke.  A force blast could leave someone with the "off balance" aspect.  This is above and beyond the consequences that can be accepted to soak up some stress.  This system really seems to give the players and GM incentive to tag, invoke, or declare aspects.  I hope that clarifies what I was looking for in this posting.

[Da_Gut]

  After being hit with any kind of attack there may be an aspect that you could invoke.  A force blast could leave someone with the "off balance" aspect.  This is above and beyond the consequences that can be accepted to soak up some stress. 

Actually, not in the rules as written. To use a force blast to apply an off balance aspect, you would use it as a maneuver, not doing any damage. Unless houseruled, of course. Though, I can see having spin apply a fragile aspect of "off balance" or some such.

[Deadmanwalking]

Actually, not in the rules as written. To use a force blast to apply an off balance aspect, you would use it as a maneuver, not doing any damage. Unless houseruled, of course. Though, I can see having spin apply a fragile aspect of "off balance" or some such.

This is more or less what I was trying to say. Attacks don't leave Aspects behind (well, not except for Consequences, anyway)...that's what Maneuvers are for. The few exceptions are very specific and somewhat expensive.

[Doc Nova]

This whole notion of aspects being the result of an attack is something I've been wrestling with since reading the books.  The idea that a fire spell could burn a foe and slap an "On Fire!" aspect on them is one that I think should be in there someplace, but I don't want to just suddenly create a Maneuvers + Damage combo attack as that puts a LOT more power in to the hands of already very powerful characters.

I have toyed with the idea of a spell's Spin enabling an aspect, and if I did that I'd open that possibility for any action to do the same, effectively making a fragile aspect a boon to any Spin-producing roll (which really isn't a half-bad idea).  Maybe, to help "balance" it out a bit more, an aspect generated in such a fashion cannot be tagged, but must be invoked (you have to spend a fate point, you don't get to do it for free) making it something that the PCs have to actually want to create (thus their story influence effort).  Thoughts?

[Biff Dyskolos]

This is more or less what I was trying to say. Attacks don't leave Aspects behind (well, not except for Consequences, anyway)...that's what Maneuvers are for. The few exceptions are very specific and somewhat expensive.

In this specific case I have to disagree with you. After being hit by a blast of water the target is obviously wet. There is an "wet" aspect there. What you don't get is a free tag on that aspect unless you performed a manoeuvre to place it there. You have to spend a fate point to invoke it.

[Doc Nova]

Well, going with the notion that a water spell could make one wet, how would that be effect spell casters?  Would there be an increase in required spell power?  An increase in control difficulty?  A compel to eliminate casting altogether?  That treads in dangerous waters (man, pun-damage is fun!) when it comes to the application of anti-caster magic, does it not?

[Myrddhin]

Well, going with the notion that a water spell could make one wet, how would that be effect spell casters?  Would there be an increase in required spell power?  An increase in control difficulty?  A compel to eliminate casting altogether?  That treads in dangerous waters (man, pun-damage is fun!) when it comes to the application of anti-caster magic, does it not?

Personally, my take would be that just being wet, even if one were soaked to the bone, isn't really an impediment to spellcasting as it's only running water (or large bodies of water like a lake) which ground out magic. That said, mechanically I'd tend toward treating the effect like a Threshold, pulling away some of the shifts of power the caster summons up and thereby weakening his magic, or possibly grounding it out completely were they fool enough to try something while standing in a torrential downpour. And if you're facing down a creature or an evoker of that capability (calling up a downpour on the fly), you've probably got bigger problems on your hands.

[Biff Dyskolos]

Well, going with the notion that a water spell could make one wet, how would that be effect spell casters?  Would there be an increase in required spell power?  An increase in control difficulty?  A compel to eliminate casting altogether?  That treads in dangerous waters (man, pun-damage is fun!) when it comes to the application of anti-caster magic, does it not?

Read the original post. MWKilduff wanted to throw a combination of evocations. First, a water blast attack. Then a lightning attack that took advantage of the fact that the target was drenched from the first attack. Since the first evocation was an attack and not a manoeuvre there is no free tag on a drenched aspect; but that target is drenched so he might be able to spend a fate point to invoke the drenched aspect.

[Morgan]

If you hit with the Water Blast try and go for giving the target the Consequence "Drenched" this should then give you the free Tag on "Drenched" for your Lightning Bolt. Or at least that's how I'd handle the effect you seem to be looking for mechanically. Consequences are just the Aspects you can place on people with a successful attack.

[Andinel]

Remember that even if the attack (or spell) "connects", if the target doesn't take consequences from it, they may have barely dodged out of the way, but at the cost of getting more fatigued, etc. So unless that water evocation hits and does a consequence, I'd say there's no taggable aspect... unless there were a lot of extra shifts on the attack. Spin may justify it.

[MWKilduff]

Thanks Doc Nova.  You are right on the money.  I was looking for smart ways to cause tags and use them to my advantage not only as the player but as the GM.  I saw a nice Magnetic Block then Metal Thrust that sucks up all the metal ranged attacks and then throws them back the next round when you attack all using Earth Evocation and Magnetism.  I thought the water and electricity combo was nice and simple.  Other thoughts are a maneuver than locks you to the floor and a knock back spell that would cause the people locked down to break or damage their legs.  I need some more ideas.

[blues.soldier]

Hmmm... I'm seeing both sides of this argument rather clearly. Here's another question: actions perpetrated by characters, both PC and NPC, affect the environment around them. Let's say that Harry uses a fire evocation to hit a baddie. Billy (The GM, obviously  ) describes the attack as setting stuff on fire--maybe because of backlash, maybe just for flavor.

Then comes the interesting part. Can Harry then use an assessment or declaration to add the aspect "The building was on fire and it wasn't my fault." to the scene? Seems to me that he could. As a GM, I'd likely allow it. Likewise if a player wanted to place a water-based Aspect after using a water evocation. However, they'd have to use the action and Fate point to do it.

Opinions?

[Morgan]

Hmmm... I'm seeing both sides of this argument rather clearly. Here's another question: actions perpetrated by characters, both PC and NPC, affect the environment around them. Let's say that Harry uses a fire evocation to hit a baddie. Billy (The GM, obviously   ) describes the attack as setting stuff on fire--maybe because of backlash, maybe just for flavor.

Then comes the interesting part. Can Harry then use an assessment or declaration to add the aspect "The building was on fire and it wasn't my fault." to the scene? Seems to me that he could. As a GM, I'd likely allow it. Likewise if a player wanted to place a water-based Aspect after using a water evocation. However, they'd have to use the action and Fate point to do it.

Opinions?

None, other than this is one of the ways you are supposed to use Assessments and Declarations. And take note that once you've spent the action declaring or assessing an Aspect you get to Tag it for free without spending a Fate Point.