Character Idea and 1st Law Question

[CurkyHangles]

Pardon me if this has been asked.  I perused for about 20 minutes and used the search function and came up with nothing of note so I thought I would ask.

I have come up with a character concept of a German special forces soldier who is a deadly sharpshooter and recon expert.  The idea I am toying with is that his knowledge of ballistics, trajectories, geometry, and trigonometry coupled with his minor talent in kinetomancy (he would actually be a focused practitioner due to rules) would make him incredibly accurate with all types of firearms.  Even more so when he has time to plan and focus on his shots.  The idea being that his planning, intent, focus, and reliance on the numbers, actually trigger his kinetomancy to influence the bullet ever so slightly in flight.  I'm not talking bullet bending, just little "nudges" to keep it on target.

My questions would be should I plan on the lawbreaker stunt, and losing my head (no big deal as this is likely a short term character) or is this grey enough and subtle enough that it would go mostly unnoticed?

[PirateJack]

This is one of those grey areas that could go either way and should probably be determined by your table.

On the one hand, it's the bullet that's killing the guy, not the magic. It could plausibly fit under the same umbrella as the Warden Swords in that case.

On the other hand, I can make pretty strong links between this and the knocking a guy off a building with wind thing, which explicitly breaks the First Law. If your magic wasn't involved the bullet would probably miss or not do as much damage, so there's a direct causal link between the spell and the death.

I'd lean towards Lawbreaker myself, but as I said, this is something to discuss with the rest of your group.

[Sanctaphrax]

If I were you I'd probably make the character a Lawbreaker Aspect-wise and story-wise. But I wouldn't take the Power. It doesn't apply to Guns attacks, after all.

[blackstaff67]

If his magic is guiding the bullet, then I feel Lawbreaker.  You might be better off using Guns to place a Maneuver on him anyway, if he's a sharpshooter.  For all intents and purposes, it's the same as whether or not Harry uses his force ring to directly smash a mortal and using said ring to throw a table or chair at mortal to smash him--they'd both be Lawbreaker.

[PirateJack]

If I were you I'd probably make the character a Lawbreaker Aspect-wise and story-wise. But I wouldn't take the Power. It doesn't apply to Guns attacks, after all.

If the spell is guiding the bullet then it's functionally an evocation, not a Guns attack, since it's merely using telekinesis on a projectile. If I were playing the character I'd prefer it that way because Channelling is easier to upgrade than skills.

[Taran]

I don't think channelling is the way to go.

Incite effect would let you do maneuvers at +2 using guns on any firearm you are touching.   Although, you could do the same with a stunt and maintain you Pure Mortal bonus.  If you take the ranged upgrade you could do gun maneuvers on other people at +2 and that would cost the same as channeling.  And probably be more useful.

But yeah.  I think you could do that with a single guns stunt.

You could take a supernatural sense like telescopic sight or cloak of shadows. 

I agree that having a lawbreaker aspect is all you need

[Haru]

I would probably look at this from the power you're going with. If you are shooting but using channeling to model that, I'd probably go lawbreaker. If the magic is merely assisting and it's a magical stunt for guns, I would go without the lawbreaker. It's basically about how much you focus on which parts of the shot, is he more doing magic and the gun is a "focus", or is he shooting and the magic is incidental?

I get the feeling that it's the latter.

In that case, a series of magical stunts might be a better fit. Maybe something fitted after inhuman speed? So, for example, you'd be allows to ignore 2 shifts of difficulty due to wind or something along those lines. Pick a few benefits like that and create a power around it. If you want to go full kinetomancy with him later, that's another story, I think.

It could also be interesting to explore the fine line between lawbreaker or not in game. But that's hardly something we can help you with here, that's something for your group to discuss.

[Sanctaphrax]

Maybe something fitted after inhuman speed? So, for example, you'd be allows to ignore 2 shifts of difficulty due to wind or something along those lines.

I don't think that's the best idea. I've never seen a GM use wind penalties to Guns attacks, and DFRPG is generally pretty anti-situational-modifier in general.

[wyvern]

Not going to address game mechanics, just the lawbreaker part.

My personal definition of when 1st lawbreaker comes is if there is no further act of free will between your spell and the resulting death.

By that definition, a spell* that nudged an in-flight bullet** to hit & kill a human would be a lawbreaker.
By contrast, a spell that set up a sort of a force-effect tube, or that adjusted wind levels, to make it so that a fired bullet would hit, would not be a lawbreaker - because in this case there's a further act of free will involved: you need to also pull the trigger.

Given that human reaction times basically don't work on the scale of a bullet's travel to its target, I'd be inclined to suggest that your minor talent is more likely to be doing the latter than the former, and thus probably shouldn't be getting lawbreaker powers / corruption.  Of course, the White Council's Wardens would be happy to remove your head from your shoulders either way.

____
* "Spell" here including the action of minor talents.
** Or frozen turkey, or whatever other projectile happens to be at hand.