No, we rolled those trappings into Craftmanship and Survival instead. Situations where the characters drive or pilot a vehicle themselves (instead of using a driver or rower) don't really come up that much. Hired help is also far more common in that time period, after all.

Craftsmanship?

I'd have thought it would have been split up between skills like Athletics (rowing), Scholarship (navigation), Presence (commanding a ship) and Survival (driving a team of horses).

Invokes modify a roll or allow a reroll while invoking for effect creates a narrative effect - it directly modifies the story.   So there is a difference.

Sure, I see what you mean, but we could also say that since one invoke gives a flat bonus and the other gives a reroll, Then we should have different terms for them as well?     Silly, I know.

My point is, invokes and invokes for effect both give benefits to the character initiating them.  Plus, any time a situation allows you to invoke, you can likewise invoke for effect.  So, why make the distinction, if it only causes confusion?

The line here is nebulous.  The differences really revolve around where the fate chip comes from and who is initiating.  Probably could use the terms interchangeably for most uses, just need to remember to pull a fate chip from the bag when a tag is used to initiate a compel.

Yep...  That pretty much confirms what I was aiming for.

For the most part...there are a few differences but, as you point out, it`s primarily a difference in terminology.  Things like not paying a fate point to make a maneuver - it would be a declaration instead.  But I don't think you`ll run into any issues if you lump aspect creation and discovery types together.  Not in play at least.  The different terms  probably will help when discussing ramifications online.

Understood...  My goal here is to create a simple, straightforward cheat-sheet that me and my players can reference during play.  I'm mostly concerned with fast, intuitive understanding and functionality during the majority of situations.

Item 3 should be "If you rolled to successfully learn or create an aspect the first use is free

What about Declarations created via fate points?  No rolling necessary.  (Ninjaed by sinker  )

Granted, you explain a lot of situations in several different ways...  It's one of the things I like about these rules.

But, from what I remember, the Alpha's fights seemed to drop into two categories:

In the earlier books, when the pack was bigger and less experienced...  A lot of alphas would have a bad guy surrounded.  Several of them nip in and out to distract the bad guy, until one of them jumps in to score a hit.  For me, that's the sort of tactic you're taking about.  The pack stays in the same zone as the bad guy, they pack on maneuvers for aspects like "surrounded", "distracted", "spinning around in circles", etc., and then one alpha tags them all to boost attack or defense and make an attack.

Later, when there's fewer of them, but they're more experienced...  You'll see just one or two Alphas (usually Georgia and Will).  They keep far out of reach and hide in the shadows or the bushes.  When the bad guy isn't looking (usually because he's busy hunting a beaten up Harry), one or both of them darts out, takes a bite, and then runs back off into hiding before the bad guy can really do anything.  Maybe there just degrees of the same thing, but to me, that sounds a little more like what Watson is suggesting.

Having read these...

Regarding compels and invoking for effect, this post by Iago may help.

More on FATE mechanics by one of the authors:
 - The Core of FATE Core
 - The Core of FATE Core, Part II

...it seems that there's a bit of extraneous nomenclature.   I am compelled (HA!) to try to simplify for my sanity and that of my players.  So, let me ask a few questions.

First, Invoking and Compelling...

Using Aspects

• Invoking
  
  • Add 2 to a roll or...
  • ...re-roll.
• Invoking for Effect
  
  • Create some narrative affect on the scene or...
  • ...limit a victim's choices (this initiates a GM compel) or...
  • ...add a narrative affecting complication (initiates a compel if directed at a character).
• Compelling
  
  • Limits a character's choices or...
  • ...adds a narrative affecting complication.

Do we really need to make a distinction between Invoking and Invoking For Effect?  Both are just using aspects to gain a benefit.

Do we really need to make a distinction between Invoking For Effect and Compelling?  They both seem to be doing effectively the same thing, only that one targets internal aspects and the other targets external aspects.

It seems like we could condense this down to:

• Add 2 to a roll, or...
• Re-roll, or...
• Create some narrative affect on the scene, or...
• Limit a victim's choices to initiates a GM compel, or...
• Add a narrative affecting complication to initiate a compel if directed at a character.

Next, Generating Aspects...

Creating or Discovering Aspects

• Assessments
  
  • This is discovering an existing aspect through interaction and/or observation.
  • Assessments are accomplished by rolling the appropriate skill. When the target is another character, the assessment may be resisted.
• Consequences
  
  • Consequences are taken when a character's stress track is overloaded or, more rarely,...
  • ...as part of a concession.
• Declarations
  
  • This is the creation of an aspect by declaring something 'was there before and is now important to the narrative'. It is usually limited to knowledge (I know this thing which will help) or awareness (I see this thing I can use).
  • Declarations can be created by either paying a fate point or by rolling the appropriate skill.
• Maneuvers
  
  • This is modifying the scene or an individual through some action.
  • Maneuvers are accomplished by rolling the appropriate skill. When the target is another character, the assessment may be resisted.
• Guessing
  
  • This is an Assessment without using a skill to discover the aspect first. It can be risky since you usually don't get fate points used back if you guess incorrectly.

Doesn't this all really boil down to:

• You can take action to discover a hidden aspect (Assessment), or create a new aspect (Declaration).
• You can use fate points or skill rolls* to do either.
• The length of time a generated aspect remains useful is determined by the time a character spends generating it and the quality of any skill checks made to generate it.

*I'm including combat generated consequences and aspects as a part of "skill rolls".

And finally, the Costs...

Paying for Aspect Use

• ...can be either spending a fate point to invoke or using a free tag. When using a free tag, the target (if a character) is not usually* offered a fate chip. If invoking, targeted characters are offered the fate chip. In general, only characters who are resisting a forced affect are 'targeted'.
• Aspects must be 'relevant' to the skill, individual(s), and situation to be used. This judgment is left to the group but usually requires a description.
  
• *Invoking for Effect may initiate a compel where the GM offers a fate chip even if a tag was used.
I'll use "invoke" below, with the exception noted above everything it applies to also applies to "tags".

In other words...

In general:

• Get a fate point when you accept a complication from an aspect.
• Spend a fate point to gain a benefit or avoid a complication from an aspect.
• If you took action to generate an aspect, you get the first benefit for free.
• The GM acts as the "banker" for fate points.

CREATING & DISCOVERING ASPECTS

Guessing:
• Guess a target’s or scene’s aspect.
• Attempt to invoke or compel the potential aspect.
• If guess is correct, invoke or compel succeeds, OR if guess is incorrect, invoke or compel fails.
• If guess is obviously wrong, the fate point spent to invoke or compel may be returned.
 
Assessing:
• Use an appropriate skill against a character, object or scene.
• If successful, GM reveals an existing aspect.
• Tag aspect.

Declaring:
• Use an appropriate skill against a character, object or scene.
• If successful, you create an appropriate aspect.
• Tag aspect.

Maneuvers:
• Use an appropriate skill against a character, object or scene.
• If successful, you create a temporary aspect (0 shifts = fragile, 1+ shifts = sticky). 
• Tag aspect.

Consequence:
• A successful attack deals stress to an enemy.
• Enemy reduces the stress by taking a consequence.
• Tag aspect.

So, while we've played FATE before, my players and I are all new to DFRPG.  So, to familiarize myself with the rules and to provide my players with a handy resource, I'm putting together a condensed quick reference guide.  If you guys don't mind, I'd like to run it by you to make sure I get it right.

First off, Aspects...

Well, first off I'd say that a better "in canon" name for Super Science would be "Ferromancy", which is what the fey use to refer to human technology.

...

No, I dont think it's common sense at all, there are plenty of books out there that have "magi-tech" and plenty of players who would be interesting in playing such a character. Im not saying to pander to the masses, but if a power is more useful to a larger player-base because it satisfies more of the "empty nooks" in the ruleset which allows for more diverse, interesting characters I'll almost always go for the less restrictive (but balanced) writeup.

It may be a fine distinction, but there may be a little bit of confusion about what Super-Science! is actually meant to represent...

Flavor-wise, it is not supposed to be magic -- not in the slightest.  It's not really meant to be magi-tech, and not exactly Ferromancy, either (though, the confusion, in or out of game, with either of those would be easy to understand).  It's science and technology, but taken to such an advanced degree that its effects could easily be confused for magic by your average person.

Because of the basic restrictions of mortal magic, Science! will most emphatically not play well with magic, even though it works very much like magic (by the rules, at any rate), and often looks very much like magic.

The goal was to use existing rules to allow for characters who want use advanced semi-futuristic gadgets to create their special effects.

So, maybe we could say that the Genus Loci of the place was twisted by the building of a hotel on a pristine spot and now blindly seeks powers? Call it a small one, a wannabe when compared to Demonreach, but something like that.

...

Whatever it is, the Being is now tied to the hotel and can affect its grounds.  It calls itself calls itself 'The Manager' - and it sometimes refers to itself as 'we'.  It can project power up to ten miles away, and when talking to vulnerable mortals the hotel implies that the echoes and ghosts that are part of it are "immortal" (so it can offer immortality).  Its wants and needs seem simple enough - it wants psyche (or magical) energy to feed on and become stronger.

This is closest to what I was thinking...  A Genus Loci, or something similar, that's been a little bit twisted and is slowly gathering power by feeding off of psychic/magical energy and/or feelings of terror.  I want it to work subtly in the background, building unease and paranoia in its victims. 

Aspects will fulfill most of that...  But I could also give a few skills and powers to actively "attack" residents.  Things like Domination (in the end, Delbert Grady had become a Renfield?), Incite Emotion, Glamours or Greater Glamours, Demense (What if the Hotel is a spot where the mortal world and the NeverNever are hopelessly mingled?), and so on.


Oh, reading the novel, I also realized...  Take a look at the dates:

Ullman said: "The Overlook was built in the years 1907 to 1909. The closest town is Sidewinder, forty miles east of here over roads that are closed from sometime in late October or November until sometime in April. A man named Robert Townley Watson built it, the grandfather of our present maintenance man. Vanderbilts have stayed here, and Rockefellers, and Astors, and Du Ponts. Four Presidents have stayed in the Presidential Suite, Wilson, Harding, Roosevelt, and Nixon."

"I wouldn't be too proud of Harding and Nixon," Jack murmured.

Ullman frowned but went on regardless. "It proved too much for Mr. Watson, and he sold the hotel in 1915. It was sold again in 1922, in 1929, in 1936. It stood vacant until the end of World War II, when it was purchased and completely renovated by Horace Derwent, millionaire inventor, pilot, film producer, and entrepreneur."

Every seven years, something happens to make the owners sell the Hotel. Built in 1907, then...  1914, 1921 (Remember the photo of Jack at the 1921 July 4th ball at the end of the movie?), 1928, 1935, it's shut down during WWII but Derwent buys it in the early 40's (1942-43?) reopens it in 1945 and sells it after losing 3 million dollars on it, then a gap in the history, Shockley buys the Hotel in 1970 (Delbert Grady!), 1977 (King writes the novel, and Torrance goes nuts!).  Since then, that gives us 1984, 1991, 1998, 2005, and finally 2012 (Next year!).  Spiritual growth rings?