I can see several factors coming into play when one character binds another, such as with rope, or handcuffs. Generally, I think most of us can assume that being bound like that is most likely an element of a Concession or being Taken Out, and the bonds will come off when it comes time. Conversely, the right Aspect means that a bound character could just buy his way out at the right time with a Fate Point.

But having rules for escaping such bonds could suit plenty of character archetypes, so if a GM opted to make it an option, how would we rule it, without creating too many rules?

I can see the Escapee's Athletics, Stealth and Might possibly coming into play. Manufactured bonds would just be a Static difficulty assigned by the GM. Actual rope-tying would be some sort of test between the binder and the victim, and I imagine the binder would use Scholarship or maybe Craftsmanship. How would we build a Stunt for people who are good at slipping bonds?

Then again, maybe it is best if this remains a function of Aspects, Compels, Concessions and Fate Points.

So, we have Conjuration, Crafting and Illusions, all of which make an effect.

For each of these, we have several of the following factors: Size, Quality, Number and Animus.

• Should these be unilaterally aligned?
• Should Crafting be just like Conjuring, but factoring in greater time for better quality and relative permanence?
• Should Illusions be like Conjuring, but cheaper because they are insubstantial?
• Should the AI of a golem be treated the same as the interactibility of an illusion? Is an illusion (in effect) a phantom conjuration?
• How expensive should Powers, Skills and Stunts be?
• Is paying to give the Golem the Demonic Copilot power the simplest way to animate it, without having to "program" the AI? Obviously programming your own AI is more reliable than the Demonic Copilot, but how much of a discount should it be to rely on the forces from the "Deep Deep South" for cheap labor?

I have a thread on Conjuring, there is another on crafting golems and other magical pets.

We may be close to getting some sort of unilateral method for adjudicating these thaumaturgical effects. What are your thoughts? Excluding, of course, "why bother?" because that is not what this thread is for - GMs will remain free to specify the difficulty of these things as they see fit in their own games. This is for those who do want some sort of guidelines. And hopefully we can make them simple and scalable.

Distance communication is an issue with spellcasters. Some wizards have forged mental links with close associates (), while others have an item they can use ().

If the spellcasters in a group all had a shared Aspect reflecting their teamwork, shared training, etc., I could simply ask them to spend a Fate Point to Declare that this Aspect allows them to communicate using their minds using an unspecified rote spell of some sort.

If we wanted to go the item route, though, here is what my thoughts are so far...

If we go with Thaumaturgy as solving a mundane problem with magic, I read that a Resources skill of +2 is enough to get a cell phone, which would generally do the job of keeping a team in communication, but for the risk of Hexing.

The question then is how to beef up this imaginary cell phone so it can be used casually by spellcasters? Sounds like using Thaumaturgy to solve an impossible problem. An imaginary, heavy-duty, EMP-shielded combat communication device would probably require a total Resources skill of +4.

I opt to establish that this type of ritual ability would probably have a base duration of a scene/half an hour - long enough for an important conversation or to keep a tactical team in contact during a quick infiltration mission.

So the Complexity is currently:
Thaumaturgic equivalent of a Cell Phone: +2
Thaumaturgic equivalent of boosting that Cell Phone to resist Hexing/etc. +2
Base duration of a scene/half an hour: +0
Each member of the communication network (Circle) requires one of a set of ritually associated elements (example, multiple teeth from the same creature), each of which will contain or incorporate ritually significant elements from each member of the Circle (hair, or something like that).

Total Lore requirement: +4 for a 1-use Enchanted item granting communication with any/all members of a particular Circle, all of whom must also have this item.

How does the community feel about this item? Too generous? Too strict?

The rules recommend that nameless NPCs not ever take consequences: taking out a Stress track should be enough to wipe them out.

But what about nameless NPC Monsters with Toughness powers and such? It seems like they should - how far do you usually go with these? Should I just not be making "nameless" -8 Refresh monsters?

Gamers can vary greatly in how much time they can devote to an RPG. Some people can fit in a monthly game of about nine hours, others maybe have weekly or semiweekly games of only 3-4 hours.

I'm trying to plot game time investment against the Milestone setup in Dresden Files RPG, but the values are pretty subjective. Has anyone come up with a mechanism for determining when Milestones happen? Major milestones can happen once every 2-3 Sessions (which I assume are about 5-6 hours each) as well as at the conclusion of a scenario or major plotline equivalent to one of Harry’s case files.

If you had a plotline you considered equivalent to a Dresden case file, and it was resolved in about 6 sessions (about 5-6 hours each), would you have given a Major Milestone halfway through, and then another at the conclusion? Or, depending on the quality of the gameplay, three Milestones?

One of my Wizard Apprentice players wanted to replicate Harry's trick of using The Sight on a victim of a powerful mental spell, and acting to unravel the spell causing the effect.

I ran The Sight as Normal. He was waffling his Lore checks to learn Aspects, but he was acing most of his Discipline checks to avoid Mental Stress - he was in there for a good 4 or 5 exchanges.

I opted to run his efforts to remove the spell construct as a series of Evocation attacks and maneuvers, with the goal of Taking Out the ritual. He didn't get far (ambulances showed up to take the comatose victim away, so they will have to try again later).

How have you handled such a situation?

A strict reading of the rules would indicate that a creature with Venomous Claws could do either of these things, but not both:
1) roll an attack to cause physical Stress using the Claws power
2) roll a maneuver to place a deadly Poisoned aspect on the target

Are there GMs who are combining the two abilities into one attack? Poisoned is nasty enough without the added physical stress.

Empathy [Reading People] allows you to make an Assessment to discover one of a target's unknown Aspects (YS 129).

Deceit [False Face Forward] allows you to provide a false Aspect to the reader attempting to use Reading People on you (YS 126).

On YS 114, the rules explain that if you get duped by a target who used Deceit to fool you into believing he had a particular Aspect, then you may have wasted your Fate Point, depending on whether the deceiver wishes to "place a temporary aspect on you... representing how he managed to snooker you."

My confusion:
If you Assess a target's Aspect normally, don't you get to free tag it (YS 115 "you don't have to worry about the usual time limit... for tagging until the first scene where you encounter the target of your assessment")?

So... why is a duped person being obligated to pony up a Fate Point if they ostensibly have a free tag coming to them?

Or is this only in cases when the duped person is spending a Fate Point to Compel the target/deceiver using that bogus Aspect?