High Level Hiring

[Becq]

@ways: Hey, your table, your rules.  I'm just saying that my opinion is that if I go panhandling for a few hours, I might justify a Rapport maneuver to gain an aspect to allow me to buy a meal despite my Terrible Resources.  But I disagree with the idea that if I panhandle for a straight month, I can boost my resources enough to buy a nice little island -- say Hawaii.

@Umbra: This is one of the things that make me uncomfortable with the 'vanilla' Thaum rules, too.  In the books, Dresden talks about how some powerful Thaumauturgy is probably beyond even him -- he doesn't say that he couldn't do it unless he spent an extra 20 minutes drawing mystical symbols or focusing his chi or whatnot.  But that's just my opinion.

[Sanctaphrax]

1. I don't think it's possible to maneuver outside of combat.

2. Given that the GM sets the difficulty for all non-opposed maneuvers and Declarations, it's very hard for anything as silly as panhandling to buy an island to happen.

[UmbraLux]

1. I don't think it's possible to maneuver outside of combat.

Why not?

[Kiero]

1. I don't think it's possible to maneuver outside of combat.

Yes you can, that's the whole point of preparatory actions when you've got the time.

[devonapple]

Maneuvering out of combat - options:

A) It's still a Maneuver - the time scale is just different.
B) It's actually a Declaration being called a Maneuver.

That's why in the Thaumaturgy rules, the Aspects you set up to meet the Complexity of a ritual are called Declarations (or sometimes Lore Declarations, even though they really use a wide variety of skills to create).

[Sanctaphrax]

What devonapple said.

There are no rules for maneuvers, as far as I recall, outside of the conflict rules. This leads me to believe that any attempt to create an aspect that doesn't use your action in a conflict isn't a maneuver.

[ways and means]

Mind you it is possible to see business as a conflict one that plays out over months rather than minutes but then I imagine all maneuvers would be opposed.

[Sanctaphrax]

Maybe using Resources for the stress tracks, Presence for defense rolls, and Contacts for attacks.

Other skills for maneuvers, of course.

[UmbraLux]

There are no rules for maneuvers, as far as I recall, outside of the conflict rules. This leads me to believe that any attempt to create an aspect that doesn't use your action in a conflict isn't a maneuver.

Not sure your second sentence makes sense...or possibly I'm simply not following. 

As for maneuvers outside of conflict, that probably depends how broad your definition of "conflict" is.  It's hard to imagine not being able to set a Building On Fire unless someone is shooting at you.  As for the book, its section on Temporary Aspects simply says "...aspects are introduced to (or inflicted upon) a character or scene by the actions of a character in the game..."  I find it difficult to imagine any scene the characters can interact with (as opposed to "cut-scenes") where they can't do something phrase-able as a maneuver. 

All that said, the Playing the Game section on Maneuvers does concentrate solely on conflicts.  How you interpret those sections is going to depend on your fundamental approach to rules.

[Sanctaphrax]

This is just a question of terminology.

I'd call setting a building on fire a Declaration if it happened outside of a conflict.

[Silverblaze]

This will either sound like I'm being stupid or rude, but honestly...I'm just curious.

Why does setting a building on fire have to be a declaration or a maneuver?  Why can't I just make fire and burn said building?

(assuming of course we're ignoring legal and moral implications as well as assuming physics will allow such a thing...)

[wyvern]

It's interesting to see other people's definitions of words.  For me, the difference between a declaration & a maneuver is one of PC agency.  A maneuver is something your character does.  A declaration is something that a player does, to establish some truth about the game world.

So, a maneuver of "The building is on fire", is your character committing arson.

A declaration would be a player saying something like "Hey, those cultists summoned a fire elemental, right?  I'm going to make a lore declaration that they set the building on fire."  Or perhaps, "Wait, we're fighting Harry?  The building should probably be on fire by now..."

[Kiero]

This will either sound like I'm being stupid or rude, but honestly...I'm just curious.

Why does setting a building on fire have to be a declaration or a maneuver?  Why can't I just make fire and burn said building?

(assuming of course we're ignoring legal and moral implications as well as assuming physics will allow such a thing...)

It doesn't, and frankly I wish that particular example would just die. It's been more detrimental to people's understanding of how FATE works than any other, and feeds into the whole "everything's an Aspect!" lunacy.

[computerking]

It doesn't, and frankly I wish that particular example would just die. It's been more detrimental to people's understanding of how FATE works than any other, and feeds into the whole "everything's an Aspect!" lunacy.

I avoid the "On Fire" debate like... well, like it was on fire.
 

[UmbraLux]

Sigh.  It's an example from the book.  Try to look past the specific aspect and look at the bigger picture.

It's a scenery aspect created by a character.  Is there anything limiting it to conflict alone?  What is different about non-conflict scenes which would prevent it?