Role-playing Games Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for gamemasters and players of tabletop, paper-and-pencil role-playing games. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

My theoretical Wizard has an aspect that has to do anger. Specifically "Fiery Temper." I'm trying to find a way to invoke that for bonus for fire spells. Would that be acceptable by general rules?

share|improve this question
Hi Moireth, and welcome to the site! We can see you're new, since you only have 1 rep at the moment, so I've edited that bit out of your question. Our community will generally be here to guide you. For now, check out our tour if you haven't already. When you reach 20 rep, you'll also be able to join us in chat. – doppelgreener Aug 7 '14 at 2:33
up vote 6 down vote accepted

The main limit of what aspects can be used for what actions is basically what the table will accept - your GM and your fellow players.

My rule of thumb is, if I can say it in a sentence with a straight face, it works. I.E. "Because Chivalry's Not Dead Dammit, I hit the demon that's attacking my girlfriend really hard." So lets try that. "Because of my Fiery Temper, I keep good control of my fire spell." That doesn't sound right to me. "Cold Fury" might do, a kind of clarity that comes from anger. However, there are two parts to spellcasting, power and control. "Because of my Fiery Temper, I pump extra power into my fire spell." That does make sense to me, so if I was another player at your table, I'd accept that aspect being used to boost power, but not rolls to control.

The other players might see things differently! Asking your group or the GM if a general kind of action is an acceptable target of an aspect is perfectly fine during character creation, especially if it's something you plan to do regularly. If you wanted to be sure, retooling the aspect to be a little more evocative or specific might be advised; That aspect looks a little bland to me. For example, "Pyromancer's Temper" might let you use it both on control and power rolls, while still getting you the same idea since it's a bit more specific. "I solve everything with fire" is might be more than you wanted, but it certainly will let you use it for fire spells!

Also keep in mind that to be a wizard, you have to have an aspect that makes that clear. (Same for every template really.) You can pretty much always use that to boost your spells. (I think they even mention that specifically in the rulebook.)

share|improve this answer
This answer puts a lot on the GM allowing/disallowing stuff, and asking the GM if something's okay. I was under the impression that in Fate, this would be a whole-of-table thing: ask all fellow players if it's okay or not okay and decide with them; the GM doesn't have any exclusive authority in the matter. The get-the-GM's-permission thing sounds more like a trait of D&D's attitude on the DM role, not actually something typically done in Fate (and in fact I've edited mentions of DM to GM in your answer). Is it different in Dresden Files? – doppelgreener Aug 7 '14 at 3:04
What BESW said. I use "GM and Table" explicitly in the first sentence, then use "GM" for the rest of the answer. As for DM vs GM, I started in D&D and never saw an important reason to break the habit. Actually, given that I didn't start in D&D you're all lucky I don't use Hollyhock God. If I was inconsistent, thank you for making me consistent. – IgneusJotunn Aug 7 '14 at 3:14
@IgneusJotunn Ok, thanks for that. Considering DFRPG's attitude on the GM not necessarily being the one to decide, I feel this answer should probably emphasize group buy-in on the idea rather than talk about what the GM accepts or doesn't. (The GM just being a part of the group, they have no more particular say over accepting something than anyone else does, or at least that's my understanding.) – doppelgreener Aug 7 '14 at 3:16
I've made an edit to convey what I have in mind about just leaving it to group buy-in, not GM buy-in. Please check to see if you're okay with it and, of course, edit or roll back as you wish. – doppelgreener Aug 7 '14 at 3:59

Yes, that's totally legit.

So long as you can describe how your character's aspect is beneficial to the circumstance of the roll, you can spend the Fate point. The GM (and the rest of the group) may ask for more clarification if they're unsure how you're justifying the use, though. Sometimes it'll turn out they think it's too much of a stretch and the GM will hand back your Fate point, so be thoughtful about your invokes.

Since this is a core concept for your character idea, you should probably talk with the group during character creation about how your wizard's Fiery temper fuels his spellcasting so it's not a surprise to anyone when you bring it up mid-combat ('cause stopping to explain it then would slow things down a lot)--and so you know if there's a limit on the kind of bonus to fire the group will consider reasonable coming from a temper-based aspect. Examples of rage-fuelled fire powers from media (like Zuko in Avatar: The Last Airbender) could help explain your idea.

share|improve this answer
"Examples of rage-fuelled fire powers from media (like Zuko in Avatar: The Last Airbender) could help explain your idea." - Or right in the Dresden Files. e.g. "Fuego! Pyrofuego! BURN!" – Compro01 Aug 7 '14 at 20:30

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.