First of all, Soulfire is not mortal magic so it is technically not subject to the Laws.

Is this a hard and fast rule or just individual group concensus?

1) A 7-shift Ward vs agressive actions applied to the entire Zone. Any hostile actions have to contend with a block of 7 that does not break even if momentarily overcome and reflects attacks back on the attacker if the attacks don't overcome it. I think attackers are going to get the idea pretty fast.

2) A 7-shift zonewide veil vs agressive actions. Yes, it is a neuromancy spell. No, it does not affect the mind. It affects the sensory organs directly each time someone tries to attack, applying an illusion of sensory deprivation for all senses (including balance). You can't attack what you can't see, hear, smell or otherwise locate.

3) A 7-shift zonewide biomancy block vs agressive actions. It works by making you utterly calm and non-agressive, similarly to being chemically sedated only more benign and without the side-effects.

4) A 4-shift conjuration for mass, 1 shift conjuration for complexity, 4 shifts to apply the aspect "transparent". What does this do? It conjures a 3-ft-thick steel bubble around every person in the zone that happens to be transparent. Go ahead; try to shoot through 3 ft of steel. You can still talk and make funny faces through it though.

5) 7 shift zonewide block vs ignition. Sorry, firearms and explosives no longer work anymore. Feel free to use them as short clubs now.

1.  I LOVE this.  In game, my spell got destroyed by the mortal cop who spent FP's to make the roll to defend    Reflecting damage is icing on the cake.

2, 4,5 . That's neat.  Creative.

3.  This is how we might end up justifying it so that it circumvents the law.  Thematically, it's a bit drab...and I'd find it a bit disapointing.  it's really up to the GM how much tension he wants...

I would say that most certainly both breaks the 4th Law and is in the spirit of soulfire. And awesome

ETA OK there is the whole if you use nonmortal magic from a sponsor does it break the laws debate, so not certainly.

ETA?

It seems, then, you can't use magic for social combat...except maybe to buff yourself...give yourself a silver tongue.  Maybe you can't force someone not to lie (a block vs deceit), but you could possibly buff your empathy/rapport by defending against deceit.
Anyways...we we're all a bit sad that it might break the laws.  Technically, you're not causing mental stress or consequences...just blocking...I mean, no-one has a problem doing mental stress to cause a consequence that you compel NPC to "fall asleep". ...

As far as  sponsored magic and the Laws go, one of the PC's is a warden...and a devout Catholic 

The character's will, belief or any other in character motivation is completely irrelevant. The decision of whether or not to take consequences and what those consequences will be is one made by the person controlling the character. This decision is made based on what that person wants in the narrative and what they think the situation calls for. Consequences are about what people want, not the hypothetical desires of the fictional entities they control.

I have to disagree.  If you`re playing the character properly you`ll take the consequences or not depending on its goal.  You can argue that that is narrative control but, in the end, the more desperate, fanatical, determined... the creature is, the less likely it`ll just concede and more likely it`ll take consequences.  yeah, so I agree that an NPC`s motives matter in a lot of situations...

Belial said this over in the A bit frustrated thread. I didn't want to derail things there,

Cheers!

Offensive Blocks do not apply an aspect and depend on it being compelled/invoked. They flat-out impose an effect that stops some types of action from happening. Want someone blinded? Block vs perception. Paralyzed? Block vs Athletics or Endurance. Strangled? Vs Might/Endurance. Put to a light sleep? Block vs Discipline. Buried by debris? Block vs Might.

Right, just like my first example for the stun.  It was a power 8 block vs...acting, basically a magical grapple, but flavor-wise it's not a grapple.

What about all that stuff about double damage and mediocre dodges because they're blinded?  That is above and beyond the actual block.

It seems to me that this goes back to invoke for effect.  You use your power 8 rote to throw a car on someone and do "x" damage, adjudicated however you wish (either the damage is part of the spell - our wizard has air magic with a "throw stuff" spell.  It's a power 7 Rote where he throws debris at baddies -or by saying it's a power 8 Might spell that can lift a car and the car does "x" damage); in either case, from what I've been hearing from people, is that you have to compel "there's a car on you and you can't get up" or "after you fall through the bridge you get hit by a passing car".  I'm not sure you can just automatically do more stuff.  But I got your point: a maneuver can kill someone when the power is that high enough.  

I guess it kind of answers my invoke for effect question.  While there is no official aspect on the target, I could just say "he got hit by a flying car, I'd like to invoke that he's pinned under it".  Then it's up to the GM to decide what happens.

Another thing I've been seeing from people is that Power 8 rotes are awesomely powerful (I've notice that somewhat in our game that the wizard takes things out quickly).  It seems well within the rules to have that kind of power...our skills are capped at superb and he gets his foci + whatever refinery...Is this kind of power unusual at this lvl? (10 refresh).  When I start to GM should I be concerned?

Random Thought : people keep mentionning blinding people.  Do you keep compelling the blindess?  Are there rules around being blind and how it affects dodge.  There must be a thread on this topic...

EDIT:  here's one.   http://www.jimbutcheronline.com/bb/index.php/topic,19694.0.html
 
Although it doesn't mention things like what Belial66 was saying,

" If it is a block against perception (offensive veil), you could really blind your opponent so they can't see you to target you and then get up to them and shoot them in the back for the next 2 exchanges - they'll roll mediocre defense since they won't be able to see the attack to dodge... Even big enemies rarely have Alertness high enough to pierce a 7-shift veil and then the entire group can hit them when they can't see to dodge for double the normal effect of their attacks."

I assume these are all compels as well?

Something I forgot earlier. Most of the things you could maneuver and then compel to be "taken out" would also simply be taken out with a weapon:8 attack. For that matter they would likely be taken out with a weapon:6 attack meaning you can use those 2 extra shifts to make it a zone-wide effect and then take out all of the mooks.

Mooks?  This is gonna target the PC's 

Finally the way I run it is that someone is compelled until they take steps to be no longer compelled. So if you compel someone to be "stunned" then they will stay out of the fray until they (or someone else) removes the aspect, or until an appropriate amount of time has lapsed to assume that the aspect is no longer applicable. I don't know if this is RAW, however it seems appropriate considering the value of fate points and the alternative of people running around with "blinded" or similar with no effect.

Thanks for the link.  After reading the (somewhat frustrated) posts on that thread from FRED, I feel a bit bad because my "wanna make spells thread" turned into a "how do aspects work" thread.   

Anyways,

This thread has been an immense help; thanks for everyone's input.