Maneuver & effect - how to deal?

[Cavallo]

I just realize my friends have found pretty easy way to deal with NPCs. They maneuver something and than invoke for effect for free to make them unconscious. If we assume that maneuver roll will be successful that's instant and free solution. How should i handle it? It's pretty valid way to take out opponents but can be easily abused and became boring very quickly.

[devonapple]

I just realize my friends have found pretty easy way to deal with NPCs. They maneuver something and than invoke for effect for free to make them unconscious. If we assume that maneuver roll will be successful that's instant and free solution. How should i handle it? It's pretty valid way to take out opponents but can be easily abused and became boring very quickly.

The GM adjudicates whether or not such an Invoke for Effect is going to be valid dramatically appropriate.

The mooks or other NPCs that ordinarily wouldn't take consequences could generally have been Taken Out in one shot using the simple stress rules anyway, so Invoking a new Maneuver Aspect to take them out is not particularly disruptive.

Bigger baddies and named NPCs may opt to buy out of Invoke-for-Effect Compels rather than be Taken Out, if they have the Fate Points or GM backing, or Concede and return later, armed with whatever Fate Points they earned for their Concession. Even without Fate Points, GMs aren't going to have their named NPC lay down because of a Maneuver - they may accept an Invoke-for-Effect Compel to be at Mediocre defense until they can shake off the Aspect, or any number of other possible Invokes, but Taken Out is probably not going to be on the table.

[UmbraLux]

Short of consequences (and probably not mild), aspects should seldom be capable of taking someone out by invoking for effect.  'Off Balance' may knock someone off their feet for an exchange, 'Winded' might make them pause for breath, etc.  Even invoking 'Broken Leg' would only limit movement, though it might lead to a concession.  It should take something like 'Guts on the Floor' or 'Sucking Chest Wound' for an invoke to take them out.

What maneuvers and aspects are being used in your example?

[Kommisar]

Unless you are using the optional "spin" rules for extra sucesses, maneuvers can not place sticky, long term aspects on someone.  As a normal rule of thumb in my group, I try to limit most maneuver aspects to something that a character could remove by performing another aspect if need be.  With that in mind, I would be very interested in what aspect your players are invoking to, essentially, take some one out.

And, as was mentioned above, you can always have your NPCs start dropping a fate point to negate the compel.

[My Dark Sunshine]

What goes around comes around. Get those minions to start doing the same to the PC's, and see how they like it. If nothing else, it'll bleed their Fate Point supplies; and teach them an important lesson.

Short of consequences (and probably not mild), aspects should seldom be capable of taking someone out by invoking for effect.  'Off Balance' may knock someone off their feet for an exchange, 'Winded' might make them pause for breath, etc.  Even invoking 'Broken Leg' would only limit movement, though it might lead to a concession.  It should take something like 'Guts on the Floor' or 'Sucking Chest Wound' for an invoke to take them out.

Although, I agree with this. Manoeuvres should not be one-hit-k.o-devices.

[Howl]

It could be okay with thugs or some nameless NPCs, but it shouldnt work on named NPCs. And you as the GM have final say in the matter. Its gonna make your sessions boring if they use it all the time... I agree with My Dark Sunshine: use the same maneuver on the PCs and they will see it isnt as fun as it looks like

[devonapple]

Upon further reflection, the players probably should not be using an Invoke-for Effect/Compel on a Maneuver Aspect to Take Out a mook unless the GM really wants you to chew through them quickly.

One should instead be using an Invoke-for Effect/Compel on a Maneuver Aspect to make the mook defend at Mediocre until it can Remove the Aspect with a Maneuver of its Own. The player is still likely to Take Out the mook with a followup attack, but they will still be using two exchanges to do it: Maneuver, then Invoke+Attack.

[Cavallo]

Thank you for your comments. My players are easy to talk to so we probably sort this out together and use some of your ideas above to deal with it in my next game. We are quite new to FATE (2 full game sessions + character/city creation) to any insight into rules are appreciated.

[Drachasor]

Imho, you want to take some people out, then it isn't hard to do this without a maneuver.  Do 5 shifts in one hit and that takes out an average mook (need more, potentially if they have toughness powers); you don't even have to kill them (or even injure them potentially).  Just remember "taken out" doesn't necessarily mean "dead" or "permanently harmed".  If you remember that, then you won't have need for maneuvers and the difficulty of taking a bad guy out will scale properly with how tough they are.

[Kommisar]

And remember!  It's a GOOD thing that your players are using maneuvers.  I have found this to be one of my favorite parts of this gaming system as it gives good, rewarding results for players doing more in combat that just swinging with the biggest stick they have each round.  My players really like it as well; especially the ones that like to play the non-bruiser, non-combat tweaked types.

[BumblingBear]

Not all maneuvers are like.... "off balance".

What if you roll weapons for "beheaded"? I think that would be 100% appropriate to take out a mook.

[zenten]

Not all maneuvers are like.... "off balance".

What if you roll weapons for "beheaded"? I think that would be 100% appropriate to take out a mook.

Some mooks can function just fine without a head

[Kommisar]

This goes back to my own rule of thumb on maneuvers.  Without a LOT of good reasons, I do not allow aspects from maneuvers that can not, in turn, be countered/removed by another maneuver of some form.  "Beheaded" or "Disintegrated" certainly fall into that area.  I leave those sort of permanent, life altering aspects to come from consequences.

Which, if you are a good swordsman capable of decapitating a person with a single swing of your blade in combat (which is HARD folks regardless of what the immortal members of the Clan Macleod has taught us) you can do that as an attack.  Mook flubs a defense roll, netting you a +4 on your attack roll with a Weapons skill of 4.  Added to a weapon rating of 2, that is 10 stresses to a mook that has, at most, 3 physical stresses?  He's going to concede most of the time and go right to Taken Out unless your GM is being nasty with you.

I would discourage the use of Maneuvers that give life altering aspects.  After all, maneuver aspects are usually fragile.  How does one come back from "Beheaded" after the aspect fades away?

- "Turned you into a newt?"
- "Umm... I got better!"

[Seb Wiers]

This goes back to my own rule of thumb on maneuvers.  Without a LOT of good reasons, I do not allow aspects from maneuvers that can not, in turn, be countered/removed by another maneuver of some form.  "Beheaded" or "Disintegrated" certainly fall into that area.  I leave those sort of permanent, life altering aspects to come from consequences.

This.  Why even have a conflict system if maneuvers can take people out?  And its worth noting that even consequences can't be life ending, so "beheaded" can't be a consequence (for most targets at least).
Otherwise you (or thew GM) could just create a social powerhouse character and maneuver for the aspect of "willing to do whatever I say" against anybody who comes along.  Not much of a game then, eh?

Another rule of thumb is that if a manuever places an aspect that's gonna last, the person who placed that aspect has to stick around to make sure it stays in effect.  Thus, you can try a maneuver to place the aspect of "grabbed by the neck" on somebody (and keep it in effect by hanging on) but not "beheaded" (since that would last without any effort from you).

[Drachasor]

This.  Why even have a conflict system if maneuvers can take people out?  And its worth noting that even consequences can't be life ending, so "beheaded" can't be a consequence (for most targets at least).
Otherwise you (or thew GM) could just create a social powerhouse character and maneuver for the aspect of "willing to do whatever I say" against anybody who comes along.  Not much of a game then, eh?

Standard (advanced) Siren Protocol makes such people a non-threat.  You can't do whatever they say if you can't hear what they say.  That said, I agree with you.