Dismissing Conjurations (which has turned into another Laws of Magic thread)

[RogerC]

Can a spellcaster dismiss/dispel their own conjurations at will?  If not, what sort of action would it be?

(I'm thinking particularly of the case where you conjure up a dagger for the purposes of killing someone with it, and then turning the evidence into ectoplasmic goo.  Of course, if you get stopped by the cops along the way, you might want to turn it to goo right then.)

I'm pretty happy just handwaving it on the side of allowing it, but wondering if there's any explicit rules for it, or any explicit examples in the canon.


Cheers,
Roger

[luminos]

I'd say that you can let the caster dismiss their own conjured items.  I mean, its their will that is holding it into form, so if they draw their will back from it, it would be gone, yes?

As a side question, would killing with a conjured dagger be a first law violation?  I'd say yes, but I'm looking for opinions.

[Deadmanwalking]

I'd go with no, the essential element of belief in the rightness of murder that makes a Lawbreaker isn't necessary to conjuring a dagger, nor stabbing someone with it. It's in the same category as a werewolf killing someone with their fangs, IMO.

[Moriden]

I'd go with no, the essential element of belief in the rightness of murder that makes a Lawbreaker isn't necessary to conjuring a dagger, nor stabbing someone with it. It's in the same category as a werewolf killing someone with their fangs, IMO.

The key difference is that the fangs aren't a physical manifestation of magic the dagger is. Theirs not much difference between creating a dagger out of magic and stabbing someone and creating a ball of fire and killing someone, the daggers just slower.

[Wyrdrune]

The key difference is that the fangs aren't a physical manifestation of magic the dagger is. Theirs not much difference between creating a dagger out of magic and stabbing someone and creating a ball of fire and killing someone, the daggers just slower.

on the other side where's the difference to taking 15 minutes to walk down to a shop and buy a dagger and making a 15 minute conjuration of a dagger? it is a difficult question...

but I have another question along that line - how about summonings? I mean - a wizard tries to summon a demon - he gets the containment spell alright and reckons, he will need it until noon tomorrow. let's say our wizard is not so good at binding after he summoned the nasty. let's say he fails at binding, but that is ok, since the containment spell still has some time good. then he is distracted, whatever, got called to a friend in need - pick your scenario - and all the time the clock is ticking.

meanwhile our demon is somewhat imprisoned in the wizard's conjuring circle, but get's his laugh when the little wizard tries to bind him. now the question: can a wizard, who has not bound the demon/spirit/whatever make it go away? say the demon looks at its watch and thinks it has nothing important to do than to wait for the containment spell winking out, and eating the wizard then, or whatevs demons do.

our wizard comes back totally exhausted from the emergency, 5 minutes to noon, just remembering there might be a demon who is set loose really soon.

feasible scenario?

[KOFFEYKID]

Im going to say Yes, you can dismiss your own conjurations (see redirecting spell energy on page 260), in my opinion it would just be redirecting the energy holding the conjuration together in a safe way (ie not using it for an attack or just letting it bleed into the environment).

As to the second question, Luminos is asking because of my character who has access to soulfire, and uses a Rote Spell that conjures (soulfire lets me use conjuration at evocation speed, neato) a sword. So Im interested in your opinions as well.

[Moriden]

and uses a Rote Spell that conjures (soulfire lets me use conjuration at evocation speed, neato) a sword

What you really need to ask your self is if i stabbed you with a sword made of fire, would you consider it using magic to kill you?. if yes then conjuring a weapon to kill someone counts especially if your using it at evocation speeds. because you have no separation from the intent and the action. now weather the sword i actually use. "appears" to be made of plastic, metal, unobtonium or fire. doesn't matter because those are all simply thematic descriptions in every case the conjured sword is made of magic.

Now if your useing soulfire to make a sword and you happen to kill a human with it your probably in deep shit regardless of weather or not its a violation. "god" has some pretty firm rules against murder. and vengenence. niether of which permits a person to take matter into there own hands.

[KOFFEYKID]

Soulfire is just the name, the effects arent always on fire, like when Harry made the super had to crush the denarien. It wasn't a flaming hand of "oh wow, that burns the skin", it was just a super large hand.

As for the bit about god getting mad at you for killing humans, I seem to recall quite a few passages in the bible that have to deal with killing people, or stoning children to death for disobeying their parents. It all depends on how far you want to take some of the stuff in there.

[Moriden]

Soulfire is just the name, the effects arent always on fire, like when Harry made the super had to crush the denarien. It wasn't a flaming hand of "oh wow, that burns the skin", it was just a super large hand.

Reread what i wrote please. i specifically mentioned that what you manifest the sword as materially doesnt matter. what matter sis that it is a creation composed entirely of Magic It might look like steal but its just as magical as if it looked like it was made of fire.

As for the bit about god getting mad at you for killing humans, I seem to recall quite a few passages in the bible that have to deal with killing people, or stoning children to death for disobeying their parents. It all depends on how far you want to take some of the stuff in there.

Are you playing a jew or a christian? if youd like to go hunt down all of thouse go smite this passages youll find that there are one and all in the old testament. Jesus put that all behind you all. The ten commandments say clearly "though shalt not kill" jesus clearly says " do not take vengeance for that is the lords, he also says to turn the other check. Every reference to violence in the new testament is about moving beyond it, forgiving, and passing up your anger to god for it is inly through him that you can be pure.

And yes there are some gruesome punishments for crimes in the old testament, the problem with quting them is not only what i already said above in that there in no way actually parts of the christian doctrine except as matters of record, but even historically most of those laws where products of the time and place as opposed to religious laws. I think that if you went and conferred with any religious scholar weather he be christian [of whatever flavor] or a rabbi. they would agree that it is inherently against the tenants of there religion to kill , it may be permitted in certain situations but it is still a sin.Just to be perfectly clear i am in no way a christian or a jew, or even close to either. i personally think that murder is perfectly acceptable[morally, there's still the law to deal with[. however that doesn't change the doctrine and beliefs of the religions that would be granting soul-fire in the dresdenverse.

[Deadmanwalking]

Yes, because werewolves get Lawbreaker for killing with their (magically conjured) claws and fangs. Oh, wait, no they don't. There's no difference between a Werewolf's magically conjured weaponry, and a Wizard's, or at least there shouldn't be.

[Wyrdrune]

Yes, because werewolves get Lawbreaker for killing with their (magically conjured) claws and fangs. Oh, wait, no they don't. There's no difference between a Werewolf's magically conjured weaponry, and a Wizard's, or at least there shouldn't be.

in the end effect it depends on the view of you character's local warden. (see to morgan in storm front, who affronted harry for trapping toot.)

[Deadmanwalking]

in the end effect it depends on the view of you character's local warden. (see to morgan in storm front, who affronted harry for trapping toot.)

True! Though I'm not arguing about physical enforcement, I'm arguing whether you should get Lawbreaker.

[Moriden]

Yes, because werewolves get Lawbreaker for killing with their (magically conjured) claws and fangs. Oh, wait, no they don't. There's no difference between a Werewolf's magically conjured weaponry, and a Wizard's, or at least there shouldn't be.

When a person transforms into a werewolf they are changing there body into another natural state. [Remember that most weres turn into normal versions of there appropriate animals, obviously loup-gauroux would probably be different' and this argument dose not apply to them. ] Thus once there done there new body is not a direct manifest on of magic, it can continue to exist indefinitely  in that new and now "permanent" state and thus using there claws or hands or feat or whatever part of there now natural body is not a magical attack.

When you use Conjuration To create a "sword" it is a Temporary manifestation of a sword composed of solidified magic so when you use this to kill someone you are using magic to commit murder. i acknowledge that this may seem a finicky distinction to some people. but it is none the less a fairly clear difference and you should keep in mind that physically transforming yourself is a whole lot more dangerous [for so many other reasons] then conjuring a sword.

[Deadmanwalking]

You're splitting hairs, particularly for, say, a Bear shifter who gains ectoplamic weight. Is his (mystically conjured) flesh a magical manifestation like the sword, and thus able to cause Lawbreaker? The rules appear to say not, and I agree with them.

It's not a question of practicality per se, but of internal consistency and logic.

[Moriden]

Is his (mystically conjured) flesh a magical manifestation like the sword, and thus able to cause Lawbreaker?

no because the change is permanent [until changed]. If you could actually create a sword, a real tangible permanently real sword with conjuration then it wouldn't be lawbreaker, it would just be like using any other sword. but you cant. conjuration only make temporary manifestations of magic. transformation and similarly transmutation. are by there nature permanent changes. and by the metaphysical rules as established in the books permanent magical creations must obey the laws of physics and are natural parts of the real world. it may seem like splitting hairs but i assure you if you go do some research into any of the real world metaphysical beliefs these kinds of distinctions are extremely common.