The letter not the spirit of the Law

[toturi]

I don't see how you'd circumvent the Physical Law aspect (it isn't right to call them metaphysical, imho, since the changes are detectable as far as the game is concerned...stains your soul which is an observable quantity);  you can't sidestep gravity.

You cannot sidestep gravity but you can fly in spite of gravity. The law of gravity isn't broken, it is being circumvented.

Falling from a great height gets you killed, falling from a great height with a parachute can save your life. In a similar way, doing X with magic gets you Lawbreaker, doing X with magic in Y manner might not.

[Drachasor]

You cannot sidestep gravity but you can fly in spite of gravity. The law of gravity isn't broken, it is being circumvented.

Falling from a great height gets you killed, falling from a great height with a parachute can save your life. In a similar way, doing X with magic gets you Lawbreaker, doing X with magic in Y manner might not.

My point was you still must deal with the effects of gravity.  Even if you fly, you only do so by directly working against the force of gravity; you can't sidestep or otherwise ignore it.  If you are falling due to gravity, you must deal with all the energy it imparts to you; there are no tricks to avoid it (but there are ways to avoid having that energy kill you).  Hmm, gravity might not be the best comparison though, since it is so universal.  Newton's Third Law might be better (for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction -- if something applies a force to something else, it receives and equal and opposite force in return).

I had thought the point of confusion is how to properly define what X is.  Taking Newton's Third Law (NTL) as an example, I personally thought some people were defining it too broadly, like someone saying NTL implies Karma of some sort (e.g. if you do bad things, bad things will happen to you), when it is actually far more specific and limited.  Imho, using magic to make it easier to kill someone conventionally is not at all the same as actually killing someone with magic.

Edit:  Well, I am amused by the fact we are having a discussion about what exactly we were discussing.

[newtinmpls]

"Drachasor, I think you've got a really brilliant idea there. Essentially, as I see it, people are confounding two sets of laws. The legal laws that the White Council enforces; and the natural laws resulting from the pseudo physics governing magic. In the novels Dresden has repeatedly stressed that Magic is governed by physical rules such as the rule of equal and opposite reactions. So, while I can take a gun and kill someone, accept that it was necessary, and move on, that is not possible with magic.

I disagree. I think that any act of violence will change the person who commits it (in this limited way ONLY do I very slightly buy into the slippery slope idea, which mostly I think is BS). In a magic-rich universe, there are so very many opportunities to change the slope into a cliff and jump off (sponsored magic, demons, Kremmler-stuff, etc. etc.) that the law against killing sort of assumes (my thoughts) that such a person is beginning what will probably be a 1-relatively fast change into 2-something really really dangerous and thus all those beheadings are seen as pre-emptive strikes.

If I use magic to kill myself the very nature of magic will force a change in my mind equal to the change that my mind created in the world. The White Council, in an attempt to prevent wizards from descending into dark magic (i.e. those forms of magic which can pervert a mage's very nature and destroy their free will"

I'm not getting this...

Dian

[Drachasor]

"Drachasor, I think you've got a really brilliant idea there. Essentially, as I see it, people are confounding two sets of laws. The legal laws that the White Council enforces; and the natural laws resulting from the pseudo physics governing magic. In the novels Dresden has repeatedly stressed that Magic is governed by physical rules such as the rule of equal and opposite reactions. So, while I can take a gun and kill someone, accept that it was necessary, and move on, that is not possible with magic.

I disagree. I think that any act of violence will change the person who commits it (in this limited way ONLY do I very slightly buy into the slippery slope idea, which mostly I think is BS). In a magic-rich universe, there are so very many opportunities to change the slope into a cliff and jump off (sponsored magic, demons, Kremmler-stuff, etc. etc.) that the law against killing sort of assumes (my thoughts) that such a person is beginning what will probably be a 1-relatively fast change into 2-something really really dangerous and thus all those beheadings are seen as pre-emptive strikes.

If I use magic to kill myself the very nature of magic will force a change in my mind equal to the change that my mind created in the world. The White Council, in an attempt to prevent wizards from descending into dark magic (i.e. those forms of magic which can pervert a mage's very nature and destroy their free will"

I'm not getting this...

Dian

Going by the rules, killing humans with magic is distinctly different from killing without magic, violence without magic, or even violence with magic.  Killing with magic DOES stain your soul in a way that those other things do not.  Kill 10 people with magic over the course of a few months, even if it was necessary to protect yourself, and you'll have corrupted aspects and be down two refresh (less free will, essentially and that also means more vulnerable to the corrupted compels).  Do that with normal humans using a gun and you don't have consequences anywhere near as severe.  Heck, even the books demonstrate this is dangerous stuff with Molly even though what she did was relatively mild.  While Jim has indicated future books will go over this sort of thing in more detail, going by how the book does it there's something special about doing certain things with magic...there's some special impact on your soul/whatever when you do that which is above and beyond the impact from doing it without magic.

That's what I meant when saying it is kind of like a physical law.  There's a backlash on your psyche that's unique to doing these things with magic, beyond whatever normal effects someone who kills might go through.  I tend to agree that most people who kill someone else do have to deal with some psychological difficulties (at least the at first) even if it is in war.  The difference is that a soldier can easily end up hating to kill but doing it when they think it is necessary.  A wizard killing like that with magic would end up killing more and more easily -- there's a corrupting influence due to the magic there.  They go over that in the books (the kid Harry has to see killed is basically not human anymore according to him), and the game also duplicates this effect via refresh and aspect changing.

[Richard_Chilton]

Here's one thing indicates that killing with magic is different than killing by normal means:

Harry a disadvantage from killing with magic (the Lawbreaker Stun), but Marcone doesn't.  Marcone, who has personally killed or ordered killed far more people than Harry killed with magic, has nothing on his sheet that reflects (well, other than his aspects).

Marcone has a pit outside of his house where he murders people.  There are people that Harry knows he will never see again because he knows that Marcone has murdered them. 

(click to show/hide)

In Even Hand we Marcone killing in cold blood - shooting restrained men in the head.

  All of this and Harry (who committed either 1 or 2 acts of murder) is marked by it and Marcone isn't.

This system doesn't have an alignment trait, or morality trait, or any "you done wrong" traits except those dealing with the laws of magic.  Which means that breaking those laws is special.

Richard

[newtinmpls]

"Harry a disadvantage from killing with magic (the Lawbreaker Stun), but Marcone doesn't.  Marcone, who has personally killed or ordered killed far more people than Harry killed with magic, has nothing on his sheet that reflects (well, other than his aspects)."

Aspects .... and in this game that's pretty signifigant. I'll buy that the 'change per death' when done by magic is faster/more intense/will lead to more aspects more quickly. I also think thats a quantitative, rather than a qualititative difference.

Dian

[Bruce Coulson]

I'm siding with Drach.  I think the rules of the White Council are approximations; rule of thumb of meta-physical reality.  (Pre-Newtonian physics, as it were.)  The White Council enforces and interprets its Laws according to political reality and meta-physical reality (which leads to problems and inconsistencies).

The White Council, however, does not get to change meta-physical reality.  It can deny its effects when politically expedient (thus altering its own interpretation), but the Lawbreaker stunt would still be appropriate, even if the White Council chose to ignore the event.

As to why the universe works this way...unless Butters becomes the Newton of Magic, we're not likely to know.  Wizards are more concerned with getting things done then the 'why' of things.

[zenten]

I'm siding with Drach.  I think the rules of the White Council are approximations; rule of thumb of meta-physical reality.  (Pre-Newtonian physics, as it were.)  The White Council enforces and interprets its Laws according to political reality and meta-physical reality (which leads to problems and inconsistencies).

The White Council, however, does not get to change meta-physical reality.  It can deny its effects when politically expedient (thus altering its own interpretation), but the Lawbreaker stunt would still be appropriate, even if the White Council chose to ignore the event.

As to why the universe works this way...unless Butters becomes the Newton of Magic, we're not likely to know.  Wizards are more concerned with getting things done then the 'why' of things.

That said, I think if you

(click to show/hide)

happen to be using a certain black staff

then I think you can somehow avoid that backlash.

[Bruce Coulson]

True; but no one (with the possible exception of the Gatekeeper) knows how that backlash is avoided...and even trying to find out might well make you a Lawbreaker of another Law...