Scope of Character Aspects and Hostile Invocations



Core of the Problem

Reading Condensed, I’m unsure of what scope of Aspects is supposed to be covered by the term ‘Character Aspect’ (officially described on page 23, but not without ambiguity; see below), and consequently, what is the scope of applicability of the Hostile Invocations rule (page 24).

Things that I assume would also be helpful for clearing the confusion: Did the scope of either or both change between editions, or am I just perhaps misreading the Condensed edition, or did I perhaps even misread the Core edition in the first place? Or is perhaps Core considered an extension of Condensed for the purposes of establishing what is RAW in the ‘baseline’ ruleset?

Details of Confusion

In Core, the Hostile Invocations did not have a label, but their behaviour was described rather precisely in multiple places:

Have Your Aspects Invoked Against You: If someone pays a fate point to invoke an aspect attached to your character, you gain their fate point at the end of the scene. This includes advantages created on your character, as well as consequences.

Invoking an aspect attached to another character gives them a fate point at the end of the scene.

If the aspect you invoke is on someone else’s character sheet, including situation aspects attached to them, you give them the fate point you spent.

Condensed is both more specific in its description of Hostile Invocation, yet more ambiguous about defining the scope of Character Aspects. Page 23 says this about Character Aspects:

These aspects are on your character sheet, such as your high concept and trouble. […]

But page 63 clearly states:

Consequence: Character aspect; represents lasting harm

So in one place Condensed states that Character Aspects are the ‘permanent’ ones, but in another it confirms that one of the fleeting ‘attachable’ types of Aspects is a subset of Character Aspect too.

I have trouble finding an explicit confirmation one way or another about whether there is supposed to be an overlap between Situational (such as Grappled or On Fire) Aspects and Character Aspects in Condensed. The text seems to imply that overlaps are possible, since Character and Consequences have their own entries in the same listing (page 23) despite having an overlap. But then the listing also includes Boosts under Aspect Types, despite the SRD telling us those are not Aspects, so I’m not sure how much I should rely on it for such analysis at all.

These may at first seem like negligible minor differences, but they cascade into a significant differences in the way the FP Economy works in those cases. I understand that some tables may make changes of their own based on personal preferences, but for now I’m hoping to figure out what is RAW, and am not looking for houserules or personal experiences of rulings.