He can also turn people in to hounds if they are predators. That might be a bit much for the game but bringing out a target's bestial nature, temporary aspects to bring out hound-like characteristics in yourself or the ability to recognise if someone is predator or prey (an assessment to see if they have an aspect that matches) would be suitable.
I'm suspecting the character would be just as bound to the laws as any knight of the faerie. Which is to say not.
It's a bit unclear really. We don't have any sponsored magic users in the books that break laws. Not any mortals, at least. We don't know how the White Council would react.
Normally I'd say that as representatives of other Accorded powers the WC would look away if one of the Knights broke the laws, but in the case of a mortal using sponsored magic granted by a non-signatory I think it is a lot more likely that the Wardens would take his head.As long as the GM and I are on the same page regarding this I don't see it becoming a problem. The above seems to be what the book suggests. If your group is part of the accords, wizards may not like what you are doing but it's not something the wardens will come after you for. Whether or not the Erlking is a signatory of the Accords will depend on just how isolated he's been.
Good point. He could always be a Freeholding Lord, or for all we know he might have signed on as head of the Goblin Nation (or something).
The real question is: how would his inclusion help Mab? Can you think of a way? Then he's probably in.
It's a bit unclear really. We don't have any sponsored magic users in the books that break laws. Not any mortals, at least. We don't know how the White Council would react.
Reading this again makes me think of Summer Knight. There is apparently a rule of sorts that denotes someone acting as a "tool" for another is not held responsible for their own actions.
That is, Toot and the other Little Folk were not held accountable for their actions, and the Alphas were also not held for their actions either (as was noted in "Something Borrowed"). Anyone that had a gripe about those things had to bring them up with Harry, and sidestepping that creates problems.
So. . .with this in mind, can you really consider trying to uphold a single groups laws (i.e. White Council's Laws of Magic) to a badged representative of a higher power (i.e. the Faerie Queens), when the higher power is actually the one responsible for those actions?
Again, just my line of thought, but it does lead to some interesting debates. . .
After some more thought, here is my shot at Erlking's magic.
Drawing on the power of the Erlking, you are able to cast spells that fit his essential nature: wildness, the hunt, balefire, bloodlust, death. This magic is under the sway and watch of the Erlking; making use of it will inevitably catch his notice.
Cost: 4 refresh for the package, not to mention the approval of the Erlking. Reduce this cost by 1 if you already have Evocation or Thaumaturgy; reduce the cost by 2 if you have both.
Benefits: Standard sponsored magic benefits.
In Addition, the Erlking's magic may be used as an element for evocation, allowing evocation effects that encourage wildness, the hunt, balefire, bloodlust, and death. This includes the ability to produce effects along the lines of divination tracking spells but with an evocation spells methods and speed. The Erlking's evocations always include the otherworldliness of the hunt in some way. Vines to trap will have thorns, balefire is eerie and green, a tracking spell may scare near by animals.
I'm not sure of a Catch for the Erlking, nor if there is anything he'd effect more than normal. I'm tempted to go with Winter, since the use of fire and the end of hunting in many places once winter starts make me associate the Erlking a little more with Summer. But this seems weak.
My recollection is that this was how the Fey views things, not how the accords were written.
Given that they Accords were written by Mab, I'd be inclined to think that the Fey view of them is entirely accurate.
The Laws of Magic are a separate entity. As far as I recall the Laws of Magic only apply to mortal magic. Sponsored Magic is generally not mortal magic, and in the case of Faerie magic it's definitely not. The users of sponsored magic already have restrictions on it's use without bringing the Laws in. The long and short of it is that if a user of sponsored magic breaks one of the laws, the White Council has no authority to do anything at all about it, unless the result is harmful to one of their members, and even then they have only limited power of redress under the Unseelie Accords. Of course if the sponsor isn't an Accords signatory, then the Council can do whatever they please to them, under whatever justification they like.
Well, if a human kills with magic, any magic, then that human has broken a Law of Magic. Now, whether or not the White Council can do anything is up for debate, but the Law was still broken.
I'm not sure how the recent "those being are the Kings" pronouncement by Jim will work out in the books.
I can't see Bob labeling the Erkling as Wild Fae by accident or getting something like that wrong. Maybe he was a king, one that was overthrown or cast out, but he seems to be an intrinsic part of the Wild Fae now. It's going to be interesting to see if they enter the novels...
That said, Jim has done a bit of retconning in the past. Read the part on the Archive when she is introduced and then read what is given in Small Favors. I could be wrong, but doesn't the first book have her absorbing all of her mother's memories when she was born? Then suddenly she got the memories after her mother's suicide. The later bit gives the character more drama and pathos, but it is different.(click to show/hide)
Who knows? Maybe Santa Claus will appear in Ghost Story - that would make as much sense as anything else.
Richard
Or, like I said before, just being a King doesn't make you different. I could marry the Queen of England, but that doesn't make me English.