Parsing the Laws of Magic (specifically the fourth)

[DFJunkie]

The fourth law states "[t]hou shalt not invade the mind of another," which seems pretty straight forward, but really isn't as far as my group and I are concerned.  Our hangup is on the word "invade," which seems to imply a lack of consent on the part of the subject.  We're attempting to resolve the question "is it permissible to enter the mind of another with their informed consent?  For instance, “why, I think someone has laid a compulsion on me, feel free to take a rummage in there and let me know what you find.” After all, a person on my property can either be an invader or a guest, their state depends on my consent.

Now, there are no explicit examples of something like this happening in the books, but there could be an implicit example.  In

(click to show/hide)

Turn Coat, when Molly invades Lucio’s mind and determines that her brain has been tampered with, it is a violation of the fourth law, but her subsequent conversation with Harry does mention Lucio’s consent, though Harry never states outright that Molly’s actions would have been acceptable with the Captain’s agreement.  Later in the book, they discuss the other Wardens whose minds have been tampered with, and again it seems like someone has checked them out and determined that they were victims of mental tampering.  I suppose it would be possible to ascertain this fact without direct mental contact, so it might not be evidence either way

.

One of my players wants to play what amounts to a Neuromancer Psychiatrist.  Her concept is that the character bills herself as both a doctor and a Wiccan, who uses her magick (the character’s spelling) to help her patients truly understand their own cognitive processes by enabling them experience their own mind as a third party (the player’s heavy into cognitive behavior therapy), for which we’re working on a spell.  (Naturally she’ll be tempted to make a few changes herself, but that’s a compel for another time.) 

Personally, I don’t think she’s a lawbreaker, but I’d like some other thoughts on the matter.  Also, has this been addressed in the RPG?  I’ve looked, but it doesn’t discuss allowable mental magic (which is a point against my interpretation I suppose). 

[Vash the white]

well, they never found out she broke the law, because Morgan said he would not tell, other whys, i am pretty sure they would have killed her because she was already a warlock

[Papa Gruff]

The borders of the laws are huge gray areas and in my opinion the original Merlin created them like this by design. To me it is totally possible to dance around these gray loopholes without getting the lawbreaker. You and your players are right. The loophole in the fourth law is the involuntary "invading" part. If you enter the mind of another with the explicit invitation of it's owner then you are on the save side. But tread lightly. The moment you start to do stuff the other person doesn't like you to do ... BAM! Lawbreaker.

In my opinion your Wiccan Psychiatrist is a valid and solid character idea. And it has great potential for conflict, as the wardens will be very interested in what she is doing, should they ever find out about the PC using her magic to help her patients. As a matter of fact I have an idea for an NPC in my campaign that might face this exact problem some day...

[ballplayer72]

The borders of the laws are huge gray areas and in my opinion the original Merlin created them like this by design. To me it is totally possible to dance around these gray loopholes without getting the lawbreaker. You and your players are right. The loophole in the fourth law is the involuntary "invading" part. If you enter the mind of another with the explicit invitation of it's owner then you are on the save side. But tread lightly. The moment you start to do stuff the other person doesn't like you to do ... BAM! Lawbreaker.

In my opinion your Wiccan Psychiatrist is a valid and solid character idea. And it has great potential for conflict, as the wardens will be very interested in what she is doing, should they ever find out about the PC using her magic to help her patients. As a matter of fact I have an idea for an NPC in my campaign that might face this exact problem some day...

And the minute you actually change something, instead of simply observe and report, BAM lawbreaker.    Changing someones mind, even with their consent, means you have to twist them and yourself to do it.
To sum up:  Looking, with permission, is ok.  Martha Liberty does it to everyone after the Peabody incident. (least i think it was martha. either way, someone does and they don't get the choppity choppity.)
But touching, even with permission, twists both parties and is hence a no no (ie lawbreaker).    At least thats how I would deal with it, going by the books.

[Papa Gruff]

And the minute you actually change something, instead of simply observe and report, BAM lawbreaker.    Changing someones mind, even with their consent, means you have to twist them and yourself to do it.
To sum up:  Looking, with permission, is ok.  Martha Liberty does it to everyone after the Peabody incident. (least i think it was martha. either way, someone does and they don't get the choppity choppity.)
But touching, even with permission, twists both parties and is hence a no no (ie lawbreaker).    At least thats how I would deal with it, going by the books.

Where the books are concerned you are right. However I would like to advise the OP to be a little flexible as a GM. Gifted Characters are often pretty low on the refresh and if the lawbreaker brings them to zero it's as good as "Your char is dead, roll up a new one" without it being the case. Also getting your head chopped of by a horde of angry wardens is no fun either.

Practitioners are often very very good at just one thing. If the PC has an intuitive understanding of how a healthy mind looks like, she should be allowed to make minor adjustments in this direction without "twisting" herself. Anything else would be plain frustrating for the player.

[Saedar]

Practitioners are often very very good at just one thing. If the PC has an intuitive understanding of how a healthy mind looks like, she should be allowed to make minor adjustments in this direction without "twisting" herself. Anything else would be plain frustrating for the player.

The problem here is that it is arguable that anyone at all truly understand how the mind is supposed to work. From a professional point of view, psychotherapy is broken down into a variety of different paradigms that understand the view of the mind (or lack thereof) in very different ways.

Personally, I would allow it but be very strict. If your player is new to the system/game/world, then a warning like "I wouldn't suggest that..." when things get dicey would be appropriate for the first few times. After that, however, I would hold strong to "You break it, you buy it" and so forth. The risk of the Lawbreaker stunt is one of the prices you pay for having phenomenal cosmic power. That said, have fun and run with it! 

[Tsunami]

The way i see it, legal Psychomancy has two areas, both of which require EXPLICIT CONSENT.

1. Looking and examining. Pretty self explanatory, as long as you do not change anything there is no problem.

2. Healing damage. That is, damage that has been done by magic in the the first place.
Since you are restoring a mind to its natural state, you would not have to twist it. It's more like removing the bonds and forces that have twisted it out of shape in the first place, and then helping it to find its natural state again. No twisting, no lawbreaker.
In the strictest sense that would not include natural imbalances in psych-patients.
Since their "sick" state of mind is the natural one, you would have to twist and bend to get them to think in ways that we perceive as "normal" or "healthy"... ergo, Lawbreaker.

[Deadmanwalking]

I'm with Tsunami. Looking and repairing mystical damage are alright with consent, anything else is Lawbreaking and will get you a Stunt as such.

[ballplayer72]

I'm with Tsunami. Looking and repairing mystical damage are alright with consent, anything else is Lawbreaking and will get you a Stunt as such.

I'd say it depends on the method.   If someone bent them out of shape and you have to bend them back thats Lawbreaker to me.   However if , like evelyn derek the lawyer from TC, you've had a bond or block placed on your memory or a compulsion laid on you thats different.  Removing currently in use magical constructs is koscher.   

Using a magical construct to undo damage caused by another magical construct is not.   Thats why luccio didn't get zapped back into cold hard matron mode, and why harry didn't call in a specialist or something to deal with what molly did to her friends or what the nightmare did to murphy.    The damage has to be recovered from and coped with on ones own.   Thats the whole point.  The person must personally reachieve balance in their psyche otherwise they will unconsciously fight what you've done, causing more problems.    Its an automatic response, a natural resistence to outside tampering.  At least this is what I get from reading the books.
I'd say allowing actual changing of the mind is Lawbreaking with or without consent.   Looking is not, and neither is removing a compulsion someone has laid or a memory block.   But trying to heal the myriad little twitches and phobias that show up as a result of mental tampering (See Elaine for ex) is just twisting in another direction. Its still twisting though imo.

[Deadmanwalking]

Okay, to be specific about what I'm talking about:

Removing magical effects from a mind is not Lawbreaking, but trying to fix the damage those effects caused to the mind in question is. You have to get over that shit on your own.

That's the distinction. The compulsions or even imposed changes themselves can be removed...but the damage suffered remains. In game terms, you can remove existing magical effects, and even change Consequences imposed by magic a bit (depending on the Consequence in question, ie: you can change Brainwashed into Used To Be Brainwashed), but can never remove a Mental Consequence without hitting Lawbreaker dead on.

[Tsunami]

I'd say it depends on the method.   If someone bent them out of shape and you have to bend them back thats Lawbreaker to me.   However if , like evelyn derek the lawyer from TC, you've had a bond or block placed on your memory or a compulsion laid on you thats different.  Removing currently in use magical constructs is koscher.   

Using a magical construct to undo damage caused by another magical construct is not.   Thats why luccio didn't get zapped back into cold hard matron mode, and why harry didn't call in a specialist or something to deal with what molly did to her friends or what the nightmare did to murphy.    The damage has to be recovered from and coped with on ones own.   Thats the whole point.  The person must personally reachieve balance in their psyche otherwise they will unconsciously fight what you've done, causing more problems.    Its an automatic response, a natural resistence to outside tampering.  At least this is what I get from reading the books.
I'd say allowing actual changing of the mind is Lawbreaking with or without consent.   Looking is not, and neither is removing a compulsion someone has laid or a memory block.   But trying to heal the myriad little twitches and phobias that show up as a result of mental tampering (See Elaine for ex) is just twisting in another direction. Its still twisting though imo.

Okay, to be specific about what I'm talking about:
Removing magical effects from a mind is not Lawbreaking, but trying to fix the damage those effects caused to the mind in question is. You have to get over that shit on your own.

That's the distinction. The compulsions or even imposed changes themselves can be removed...but the damage suffered remains. In game terms, you can remove existing magical effects, and even change Consequences imposed by magic a bit (depending on the Consequence in question, ie: you can change Brainwashed into Used To Be Brainwashed), but can never remove a Mental Consequence without hitting Lawbreaker dead on.

Thats basically what i mean. You remove the magical Stuff that has bent the mind out of shape.
The Damage that's left behind... maybe, just maybe, a highly skilled Psychomancer could make it easier for someone to recover from these things.
But it should be extreeeeeemely complicated, since it would be hard to determine which changes were caused by magic, and which changes are a result of having lived through the BrainBend and the need to cope with that experience.
That's really more psychotherapy than psychomancy. Like Murphy's nightmares for example. Removing those would be a NoNo.

OK to remove                                     Not Ok to remove
Stuff that is actually done by magic <-> Stuff thats a result of having lived through such an experience


I think a psychomancing psychotherapist could use psychomancy as a great diagnostic tool, provided his patients understand magic enough to actually be able to give consent for him to snoop around in their heads.

[Papa Gruff]

I agree with all of you guys. And I try to take the laws very seriously in our game but in the OP's example I think we can be a bit more flexible on issuing the stunt. After all the PC has special training as a psychiatrist and nows a thing or two about the mind. If the OP follows the lawbreaking rules by the letter then this would pretty much destroy a pretty neat character idea and that can't be the intention of the rules.

The confrontations that can come of the danger of lawbreaking alone make it worth to just say: Yes, she can help people a little bit with her talent. She could do the bad stuff too, thats not the question, but she decides not to, and never crosses this special threshold. She has to be really really careful though. If she ever fails with her magic and blunders through the mind of a patient, then lawbreaker it is...

[Tsunami]

Well, this part of the Concept

... who uses her magick (the character’s spelling) to help her patients truly understand their own cognitive processes by enabling them experience their own mind as a third party (the player’s heavy into cognitive behavior therapy), for which we’re working on a spell.

would basically be looking and examining plus referring that information to another person... I don't see a problem here. No Lawbreaking required.
Changes are another matter, but DFJunkie stated that he's gonna use that for compels... so there's really no problem at the moment.
Just let the character meet patients with actual magical problems every once in a while so she can actually use her skills to heal. Otherwise use psychomancy as a diagnostic tool to see what the patients problems are and make them aware of it. I bet that's something psychologists in in our reality would love to be able to do.

Also, maybe a really minute change now and again would not be much of a problem, but if she starts to go bigger, or does it more and more often... thats definetly going to lead to a lawbreaker status.

[Kordeth]

Well, this part of the Concept

... who uses her magick (the character’s spelling) to help her patients truly understand their own cognitive processes by enabling them experience their own mind as a third party (the player’s heavy into cognitive behavior therapy), for which we’re working on a spell.

would basically be looking and examining plus referring that information to another person... I don't see a problem here. No Lawbreaking required.
Changes are another matter, but DFJunkie stated that he's gonna use that for compels... so there's really no problem at the moment.
Just let the character meet patients with actual magical problems every once in a while so she can actually use her skills to heal. Otherwise use psychomancy as a diagnostic tool to see what the patients problems are and make them aware of it. I bet that's something psychologists in in our reality would love to be able to do.

Also, maybe a really minute change now and again would not be much of a problem, but if she starts to go bigger, or does it more and more often... thats definetly going to lead to a lawbreaker status.

I'd be more concerned with this approach breaking the Third Law than the Fourth. It seems to live in the same sort of gray area as a Soulgaze, but very close to the edge--unless she's devising a spell that only shows the subject her own mind and doesn't give that information to the wizard herself.

Maybe she could devise a thaumaturgical ritual to reverse the effect of a soulgaze, so the target sees his own soul instead of hers, and she sees nothing (or maybe her own soul--nothing says drama and plot hooks like repeatedly gazing into your own private Abyss to help other people).

[ryanroyce]

 It sounds to me like this practitioner is trying to, in mechanical terms, heal mental consequences with psychomancy in the manner that biomancy may heal physical consequences.  She could use Reiki, replace physical with mental, and call it a day.

 The problem is that human science understands biology and physical trauma far, far, far more thoroughly than it understands psychology and mental trauma.  When someone has a fractured bone, a trained biologist will know exactly what needs to happen in order for that wound to be healed... and thus a trained biomancer could help speed the body along on its natural healing process.  With mental trauma, however, it is nigh impossible to have that level of certainty.  A psychomancer attempting to help a mind's natural recovery would have to tread very lightly to avoid accidentally

(click to show/hide)

bleeping

something up and making things worse.  The human mind is used to being Alone in the dark space behind its eyes and it may not react well to having that solitude disrupted, regardless of what that person may have said.

 Regarding Lawbreaker, I don't have PG with me to confirm this either way, but are we certain that

(click to show/hide)

Molly entered their minds without their consent

?  Part of me wants to say that informed consent will allow a PC to avoid acquiring Lawbreaker, since magic respects that sort of thing in regards to other thresholds, but it wouldn't necessarily let them avoid being tried as a warlock by the White Council anyway.