Declarations - Help me understand some of them

[Watson]

One of the things that I am not really fond of in the FATE-system is certain Declarations. I understand the theory behind Declarations, and some "types" of Declarations are perfectly fine - the player states something about the game world, rolls the dice, and if successful, the statement is true (most likely resulting in an Aspect).

I have no problems in Declarations relating to Contacts, Resources or knowledge-based skills like Scholarship. My problem comes when dealing with skills like Investigation to "add" stuff to the scene. For example:

For example, if your character has a strong Alertness or Investigation skill, you might use a declaration to add features to a scene for you to use to your advantage—when the fire starts, your character just “happens” to notice that the janitor left a bucket of water in the hallway.

The fact that you can roll Investigation to "add" a bucket of water just by looking for it is the part that I don't really like. What I mean is that, to be able to do that, one has to establish that there is a bucket of water there to begin with, and that the skill roll is to find it (not to add it). Technically, one could then use Investigation to "find" the characters new shiny car using the same philosophy (sure, Resources would be the proper skill to use here, stating that you have previously bought the car).

Don't get me wrong, I don't really dislike the use of Declarations in this way. I want to understand how it is intended to work, to see that I understand the rules as intended.

Or is the problem with certain Declarations (such as Investigation based ones) more of how you get to the point where you roll the dice? Two examples:

Player: “I really could use a bucket of water to extinguish the fire. I am rolling my Investigation to make a Declaration about me finding one.”
GM: “OK, roll against difficulty 4.”

Player: “I really could use a bucket of water to extinguish the fire. Is there one that I can find?”
GM: “There might be, roll your Investigation against difficulty 4.”

The first example is what I kind of don’t like. The second one is more what me as a GM would like to see, but that is more of an Assessment than a Declaration… or?

Thanks for your help.

[UmbraLux]

First a definition (since not every defines them the same way):  Declarations are perception and knowledge based statements of fact.

Using your quote, a declaration of "there's a bucket of water in the corner" would probably be alertness based if it just takes a perception check to see (it was partially hidden) or investigation based if you had to search for it (it was completely hidden).  As far as the narrative is concerned, the bucket was always there - it just wasn't important to the story until someone looked for it.  

Or is the problem with certain Declarations (such as Investigation based ones) more of how you get to the point where you roll the dice? Two examples:

Player: “I really could use a bucket of water to extinguish the fire. I am rolling my Investigation to make a Declaration about me finding one.”
GM: “OK, roll against difficulty 4.”

Player: “I really could use a bucket of water to extinguish the fire. Is there one that I can find?”
GM: “There might be, roll your Investigation against difficulty 4.”

The first example is what I kind of don’t like. The second one is more what me as a GM would like to see, but that is more of an Assessment than a Declaration… or?

The first example is a declaration.  The second appears to be a more traditional search roll.  It's worth noting you as GM set the difficulty.  If you really don't think a bucket would be left out in the "marble hallway" you can simply say so - or set the difficulty arbitrarily high.  (Though I'd recommend just stating it.)

In the end, Declarations and Maneuvers both give the player an amount of authorial control over the story.  Assessments are closer to the traditional model of discovering what the GM has in place.

[Watson]

As far as the narrative is concerned, the bucket was always there - it just wasn't important to the story until someone looked for it.

Thanks for the reply.

Yes, it might be more of Alertness than Investigation, but that does not change the situation. I think the thing that annoys me is the fact that the bucket automatically is there after the player says he is making an attempt to roll use his skill for the Declaration – now it is just a matter of finding it. It is no longer a question of whether there is a bucket or not – the question rather becomes a one of whether the character can find it or not.

What if the current location is a more or less empty hallway, where hiding stuff is nearly impossible? In this case it ought not to be a question of whether the bucket can be seen or not, but rather whether there is a bucket or not (and using Alertness for that just sounds wrong).

[computerking]

What if the current location is a more or less empty hallway, where hiding stuff is nearly impossible? In this case it ought not to be a question of whether the bucket can be seen or not, but rather whether there is a bucket or not (and using Alertness for that just sounds wrong).

I think in that case, you would have already described the scene as an empty hallway, and you would be able to tell the player that the room has a "Totally Empty" aspect, and hand him/her a fate point. Now, if he were to look in rooms off of the hallway, he might be able to make an Investigations Declaration at that point.

[Masurao]

I also think you should view Declarations as means for players to complement the GM, I believe it is even stated in the books in a manner like this. You, as a GM, can never detail everything about a building, or foresee every action the players might make. For example, the fire could have been set by accident through magic and you really hadn't thought about that happening. The players want a Declaration to find a bucket and that might suit the GM just fine.

On the other hand, if you had planned a fire as part of the narrative, you could simply say, "Nope, no bucket of water or fire hose nearby. No Declaration."

Declarations are great ways to handle any curveballs the players might throw at you, as well. If they think of something you hadn't, Declarations are a great help, even that is mentioned in the book. Something about a Declaration about an air vent, where the GM hasn't mapped out the entire outside of the building.

As often said as it is, it's still your game and you should decide what logic to use for Declarations with your table and what works best. The players should use Declarations to help along the narrative, not to alter reality.

A memory came to mind of my olden D&D games, where we might search every room for hidden doors, whether it was logical to do so or not. You could do so in DFRPG too, saying "I roll Investigation to find a hidden door", but that would get real old, real soon. However, when you enter the bad guy's secret hideout and he isn't there, while you expected him, a player might declare "that bad guys often have secret escape routes!" and roll Investigation to see if he can make that Declaration. You might have this roll resisted, as someone actively tried to hide the door, or simply a higher difficulty.

[benign]

Remember, you are the GM. If a player is trying to make a declaration that you think is unreasonable, you can always inform them thus and not worry about it. This is why, for example, no matter how high a character's investigation is, they will not be able to find military grade weaponry loaded with garlic-cold iron rounds leaning up against a wall in every scene.

That said, declarations are your friend. Yes, even as the GM. It does a few things for you, all of which are good. Firstly it allows you to use brevity when describing a scene, trusting that players will fill in plausible and necessary details as they become relevant. It also draws players into the game as authors of their own fate rather than just observers; it gives them a feeling of creativity, spontaneity, and control. Finally and most deviously, it conditions your players to accept details added in the middle of a scene, which gives you a lot of flexibility as a GM.

To illustrate that last point, let's take your bucket example a little further. The players are fighting a sorcerer in an office building, and someone has set the hallway on fire. Thinking quickly, one of your players attempts to make the declaration that there is a bucket nearby filled with water. "After all," he says, "it's after hours, so the janitors were probably out and about until we started this fight." Deciding his declaration is plausible, you set the difficulty at 4. He succeeds, and uses his newly found bucket to douse the flames. Now it's the sorcerer's turn, and things aren't going well for him. He needs a way to bug out and prepare for round 2 with the PCs later, but you're not sure if he'll be able to escape on his own. Bingo, declaration time! The bucket was there, so you have the sorcerer basically use a declaration to find the janitor who was using it, and all of a sudden he has a hostage! Now in another game, your players might protest and demand retroactive alertness checks, say their characters would have found the janitor and so on. In DF, they know how declarations work. Hell, they just used one themselves. So they are conditioned to accept this unfolding drama, giving you a lot more space to play in.

If you are still leery about declarations, I think it is reasonable to tell your players that the default assumption in your game is that every declaration is untenable until proven otherwise. It is their job as players to convince you of the plausibility of their declaration. Thus "I find a bucket," might be an unacceptable declaration, but "Since we saw the night janitor moving around before we got in this fight, I will use a declaration to attempt to find his water-filled bucket," would be much more likely to pass muster.

[Khalis231]

Yes, it might be more of Alertness than Investigation, but that does not change the situation. I think the thing that annoys me is the fact that the bucket automatically is there after the player says he is making an attempt to roll use his skill for the Declaration – now it is just a matter of finding it. It is no longer a question of whether there is a bucket or not – the question rather becomes a one of whether the character can find it or not.

If it helps your suspension of disbelief, this isn't exactly how declarations work. It isn't a case of 1) player makes declaration, 2) bucket is introduced into the scene 3) player rolls skill to find it. That's more like an assessment (player rolls to discover a previously decided-on in-game fact, even if the player is only guessing that such an aspect exists). This is what makes declarations so different from traditional search rolls - if the player fails the roll when making a declaration, the fact is not true. Thus, if the player doesn't find the bucket with a declaration, it's literally because there is no bucket. The roll is to establish whether or not the statement is true, not whether or not the player notices the subject of the statement. Declarations happen more at the narrative level of play, rather than the in-character level, even though they act a lot like in-character actions such as searching.

Of course, a player could try instead to make an assessment, saying "there's probably a bucket around here because we saw the janitor cleaning up," and it would be almost exactly the same mechanical process, rolling the skill to find the bucket. But in an assessment situation, the GM has authority over deciding whether or not there's a bucket to find, while a declaration gives the player a chance to control the narrative, subject of course to the GM's approval via difficulty-setting or outright overruling.

[Khalis231]

Finally and most deviously, it conditions your players to accept details added in the middle of a scene, which gives you a lot of flexibility as a GM.

I wanted to pick this bit out because it is so, so powerful in terms of creating drama. Many other systems, like D&D, take a more simulationist approach to the game. DM creates the room, DM describes the room, players interact with the pre-existing room. Players would call shenanigans if you, as the DM, tried to pull something out of your butt to crank up an unexpectedly easy fight, or introduced a detail that they should have had a chance to notice earlier. It's not like you can't do these sorts of things in D&D, but the system tends to reinforce a different play style, and such additions feel more artificial. In contrast, the DFRPG allows for crazy flexibility to make a scene cool, dramatic and just as challenging as you want it to be, which makes for a really awesome game.

[Watson]

This is what makes declarations so different from traditional search rolls - if the player fails the roll when making a declaration, the fact is not true. Thus, if the player doesn't find the bucket with a declaration, it's literally because there is no bucket.

Thanks for the replies. I think that Khalis231 is on the right track in explaining the issue. If the roll fails, it means that the fact is not true, not that the fact is true, but the character failed to notice it. I think that works in case of Investigative-based Declarations.

Note that I am fine with, for instance, Craftsmanship-based or Resource-based Declarations.

Of course, a player could try instead to make an assessment, saying "there's probably a bucket around here because we saw the janitor cleaning up," and it would be almost exactly the same mechanical process, rolling the skill to find the bucket. But in an assessment situation, the GM has authority over deciding whether or not there's a bucket to find, while a declaration gives the player a chance to control the narrative, subject of course to the GM's approval via difficulty-setting or outright overruling.

This is also very important. To clarify further, an Assessment would be the player saying “I look in the room to find anything useful to fight the fire” whereas a Declaration would be “I look in the room to see if I find a bucket of water to fight the fire” – a small difference in wording, but it makes a big difference at the table. And, in case I as a GM don’t want the character to find the bucket, I just give him a very high difficulty to beat (in the same way I can say, when doing the Assessment, “no, you don’t find anything”).

[UmbraLux]

What if the current location is a more or less empty hallway, where hiding stuff is nearly impossible? In this case it ought not to be a question of whether the bucket can be seen or not, but rather whether there is a bucket or not (and using Alertness for that just sounds wrong).

Just say "no".  You as GM set the difficulty for declarations.  When it doesn't make sense, no is the answer.  If it's just extremely unlikely, I'll just say so and set the difficulty fairly high.  More reasonable declarations are easier.  

I tend to extend this a bit further and allow anyone at the table to veto a declaration.  It has to fit the group's vision of the situation.  I'll also treat it as a negotiation.  Perhaps the bucket in the hall doesn't make sense but there's a door labeled "Utility" at one end...

Note that I am fine with, for instance, Craftsmanship-based or Resource-based Declarations.

Craftsmanship hasn't come up (I'll remember it thought!) but I use Resources declarations for a lot of minor equipment.  You want to have a chainsaw in your truck?  Roll resources...

It keeps us from having to make long lists of stuff and from deciding what characters may have on them at any one point in time.

[Watson]

Craftsmanship hasn't come up (I'll remember it thought!) but I use Resources declarations for a lot of minor equipment.  

Craftsmanship is more of creating stuff, I suppose. The trapping for the skill relating to building says that building is more or less handled by Declarations (which I am perfectly fine with).

[noclue]

There's really no difference in the fiction between your two examples. The player looks around, sees a bucket and uses it. There's also no mechanical difference. It's an aspect, "bucket."

Why quibble about how the player says "mother may I?"

[devonapple]

Craftsmanship is more of creating stuff, I suppose. The trapping for the skill relating to building says that building is more or less handled by Declarations (which I am perfectly fine with).

We've used Craftsmanship to make Declarations about opportunities (Aspects) within a Zone or Location which our techie could exploit (such as "Accessible Wiring" or "Weak Walls").

[sinker]

Thanks for the replies. I think that Khalis231 is on the right track in explaining the issue. If the roll fails, it means that the fact is not true, not that the fact is true, but the character failed to notice it. I think that works in case of Investigative-based Declarations.

Actually the book suggests that if a declaration fails it isn't that it's simply not true, it's that the character believes it to be true and the world supports that with appearances. The book uses the example of someone declaring a vent in a building. When they fail they find something that looks like a vent but is actually a air conditioner that falls noisily when it's loosened. Or to use your bucket example, perhaps the character does find a bucket and throws it into the fire... but it's actually a wastebasket, full of discarded paper... Or it's simply an empty bucket.

Of course it's just a suggestion with the alternative being exactly as you described (simply no bucket), but it definitely makes for a richer experience and gives added teeth to failure.

[Watson]

There's really no difference in the fiction between your two examples. The player looks around, sees a bucket and uses it. There's also no mechanical difference. It's an aspect, "bucket."

Why quibble about how the player says "mother may I?"

It is true that there are neither any difference in the fiction (it is found or not) nor on the mechanical side (still a roll agains the same skill). However, there is a difference in how it is activated/triggered (Declaration = the character is looking for a specific thing, Assessment = the character is looking for something in general what is found is decided by the GM).