Magical enchantment and the first law.

[TheeGravedigger]

According to the book, using a gust of wind to knock someone off a building is a first law violation.

Wardens swords are enchanted, and can be used to kill without violation of the first law. What doesn't make sense to me is that if a warden's sword is used to remove a magic shield from someone to allow the sword to reach them, they're basically using magic to make a killing possible, which seems to fall under using magic to kill someone.

Someone using an enchanted bullet, or an enchanted gun that guides the bullets. Is that a first law violation? The bullets themselves are doing the killing, like the sword. Remove the magic, and the person would still be dead.

[JosephKell]

Using an enchanted item to kill violates the First Law (this is supported in the books,

(click to show/hide)

there is a scene near the beginning of Summer Knight where Dresden avoids flattening two hitmen with his ring

).

The Warden Sword doesn't violate the First Law because it is a sword (it is "mundanely" able to kill by virtue of being a sharp piece of solid metal).  There isn't a beam of magic light shooting from the sword to the target.

As to why the sword cutting through spells doesn't violate the first law is because ending a spell usually doesn't lead to inevitable death.  I am having trouble coming up with a non-contrived example.

If a fugitive practitioner is standing on a "force bridge" of magic that spans a 200 foot drop, I suppose counterspelling it would be a violation of the First Law.

But if a fugitive is cowering behind a barrier, cutting through the barrier just ends the barrier, it doesn't kill the fugitive (like blowing someone off a cliff would do).  It just leaves the fugitive vulnerable as anyone else would be.

The option to use Warden Swords as Weapon:6 by using a charge (see the update to Enchanted Items) does seem a little strange, but they are supposed to be REALLY sharp.