So I've noticed that a lot of questions tend to get asked repeatedly and as such I thought I'd put together this thread that we could point people to for answers. Since many of these questions don't have RAW answers I was going to make this thread an open place for people to state how they would handle X situation. Feel free to make suggestions as to how you would handle things and I'll add them, but please don't argue about what someone suggests unless you're backed by RAW (and not just your interpretation of RAW or some implication in RAW but direct contradiction in RAW). Also feel free to suggest other things that tend to come up if you feel I missed any and I'll add them as well. Finally I know that I'm quite verbose and sometimes over-complicate my statements, so please ask for clarification or suggest a clearer way of stating something and I'll try to adjust it.
CirclesMost of us agree that mechanically magic circles are treated like blocks or thresholds, requiring a supernatural creature or effect to get above the block to break it and possibly dampening powers of supernatural things contained by it's strength. How to create a circle is done different ways by different people. Suggestions include:
- Simply taking an action and rolling conviction, lore, or discipline (depending on the situation and the GM) to determine the block's strength.
- Treating it as a ritual, with a maximum strength equal to lore, and a creation that involves rolling discipline against a maximum of your conviction to determine strength. Though some people would ignore conviction and go straight for discipline.
- Taking an action and rolling against a set difficulty determined by the GM. The strength is then really a narrative concept that the GM determines, deciding on the fly what could be powerful enough to break through and what wouldn't be.
- Making it a lore/conviction/discipline maneuver and then compelling anything that would be effected by it.
- Setting a threshold strength relative to the refresh cost of the person making it (I.E. using that measure of will to determine the circle's strength).
LawbreakerLawbreaking is made up of a large number of concepts that GMs can't always agree on. By RAW there are two components to how the lawbreaker power works. Firstly the laws are actual rules of the universe and any time they are broken the person who did it is actually changed by the act itself, regardless of any other factors. This is represented by the character being required to change an aspect upon breaking the law. Secondly having the lawbreaker power also denotes the character is now a marked man. If the council ever finds out he or she will be hunted down by the wardens.
Using only these two factors one can see how some GMs do not make sponsored magic users take the lawbreaker power, because 1) the magic being not their own distances them from the universal laws and 2) sponsored magic users often fall under a different accorded faction which would shield them from the white council.
There are other sides to the power that aren't always used by all GMs. One is the concept that any human being must adjust when they severely harm or kill another. That adjustment can lead them down a dark path pretty quickly and it's a concept that applies to sponsored magic users as well as wizards.
As for lawbreaking itself there are a number of factors that people use to determine if a law has been broken. One is intent. Did the spellcaster intend to break the law, or have knowledge that lawbreaking was a likely result of the spell? This often applies to things like wards, where if someone creates a deadly ward and someone dies that was a result that they must have foreseen.
Another means to determine if a law has been broken is often the result itself. Did the person break the law? An example from the forums is a wizard is fighting what he believes to be zombies and crushes one. Later they are revealed to be drugged humans. Was his intent to kill a person? No, however he did, and (because of the universal law) that changes him regardless.
There are often looser or tighter interpretations of the laws. Some GMs consider transformation done to a willing target to be grey but not black magic, and there's a variety of different opinions on how distanced magic must be from a killing (I.E. can you hold someone still and then shoot them?). Some GMs consider any mental/social stress or consequences deal to be against the laws, but others stick to the strict letter of the law (no mind reading and no compulsions). Almost all of us agree that one can go forward in time all you want but stopping time or going back would be messing with the flow of time.
Compels and Player compelsTo be continued... Cause I'm tired....
