Hey, folks. I've had a few people from the forum email me directly asking for an official word on Lawbreaking. We hate doing official word stuff in general, because we believe in folks getting to own their own version of the setting with each campaign.
So this isn't an official word. Instead, it's what our perspective would be on the topic if we were putting together a campaign of our own.
Before I get into it, I want to note that I don't think it's particularly fruitful for folks to hijack every conversation to bring up the breaking of the Laws (and it seems like that, sometimes, when we peek in). But that's not a one-sided issue. I think anyone posting a topic for discussion that is NOT interested in discussing the Lawbreaking side of the topic should say so in the original post (maybe even in the subject line, so it's always obvious to folks clicking in, e.g., adding [No Law Talk Please] or similar to the subject). It would then be considered rude and bad form to start talking Law in that topic; start another topic and link back to the original if you feel you absolutely must.
Finally, I'm pretty busy! So I'm firing this off, but I probably won't be available for follow-up conversation. That shouldn't stop all of you from discussing amongst yourselves, of course. Just trying to set an expectation here.
So, the basics, in very short form:
It absolutely is a law of the universe that breaking one of the Laws of Magic actually changes you. Us folks who've worked on the RPG find this to be established in the canon, in the books, and as such don't see it as particularly up for debate. If you disagree, great, but shouting this over and over again just isn't constructive.
Intent matters. If you have the intent to kill someone with magic and you do it, you're changed.
Edge cases do come up in the grey areas: self-defense, first mistake, and accidents. The canonical answer on the first two seems to be a yes. Personally, I'd make it a yes to all three, because I don't think the powers that be in this regard are much for finesse, and trend towards a draconian posture. So, game-canon (if not book-canon) is that it still counts. That said, my personal draconian posture on this is founded in confidence that me and my crew can have *fun* when an accidental Lawbreaking occurs. If it's not fun for your table, there's certainly wiggle-room for the universe (i.e., the game mechanics) to give you a pass. In other words, if pushing hard for the stunt to show up in the case of an accident ruins the fun, makes the GM come off as a jerk -- then don't push hard. But me? I'm all go hard or go home. In my games, you'd get the stunt. Chad, on the other hand, is personally uncomfortable with the idea that the edge cases, seeing them being low on or absent of intent. In his games, the universe would let you off the hook this time.
But even when the universe gives you a pass (i.e., you don't pick up a Lawbreaker stunt), the White Council manages to be even less forgiving. Remember that the Doom of Damocles is a rare mercy, rarely exercised, and requiring a mutually-imperiled sponsor; beheading is the prevailing preference.
Harry is an unreliable narrator. We can only model the universe based on his imperfect understanding of the universe, but he could be wrong. Which is at the root of why we say...
It's your table. Figure it out on your own so you're all happy. Talk honestly, openly, and clearly. Mind the fun. That's what matters. But remember:
This forum isn't about just one table. That means what works at your table might not work at someone else's. That doesn't make your table wrong, and it also doesn't make their table wrong. So quit acting like either is the case. This is a big tent. Make some room for each other, and focus on the areas where you agree.
