ParanetOnline

The Dresden Files => DFRPG => Topic started by: Madmacabre on January 28, 2011, 02:20:01 PM

Title: Addictive Saliva and the 4th Law of magic
Post by: Madmacabre on January 28, 2011, 02:20:01 PM
One of my PC is an infected red.

What happens when he uses his addictive saliva power? Does he break the 4th law? Is he subject to the Warden's retribution? Can he be forced to take the Lawbreaker power?

And given the vampire war being active in my game, are red infected targets of white council? Or do they still consider them humans?


Thanks
Title: Re: Addictive Saliva and the 4th Law of magic
Post by: Kommisar on January 28, 2011, 02:27:46 PM
No, use of the saliva is not a law breaker offense.  It's not "magic", he is not a magic user, and not under the purview of the White Council.

As for his status.  That will really depend on a lot of factors.  Is he a part of the Order of St Giles?  How good a job is he doing fighting his hunger?  Who is he associating with?  Which warden/wizard does he bump into?  All of these, and probably more, will help determine if he is a target or not.  As per the novels, the White Council is loosely aligned with the Order of St Giles in that they each recognize that they are fighting the same enemy.  That, of course, does not mean that every wizard is going to be an understanding soul when they run across an infected that, most likely, will turn into a full on Red Court at some point.  If they are not associated with the Order and lack the tattoos, I can definitely see some Wardens taking the preemptive action stance on an infected.
Title: Re: Addictive Saliva and the 4th Law of magic
Post by: Madmacabre on January 28, 2011, 02:37:49 PM
Quote from: Kommisar on January 28, 2011, 02:27:46 PM
No, use of the saliva is not a law breaker offense.  It's not "magic", he is not a magic user, and not under the purview of the White Council.

Good point...

Now, with regards to the LAWBREAKER power, if the PC keep using its saliva to enthrall humans, should I force him to take a level or two?

Title: Re: Addictive Saliva and the 4th Law of magic
Post by: Kommisar on January 28, 2011, 02:43:22 PM
Absolutely not.  It's not magic.  Well, it is supernatural, but not magic.  The Lawbreaker Power would not apply to him either.  After all, it gives bonuses to and is tied to magic used to break that particular law.  He is not using magic.  Just like you wouldn't drop Lawbreaker status on a mortal that injects someone with a "Truth Serum" or some such.

Remember, the White Council is not Interpol or UN peace keepers.  They deal with wizards and other magic practitioners.
Title: Re: Addictive Saliva and the 4th Law of magic
Post by: Madmacabre on January 28, 2011, 02:57:47 PM
Thanks a lot for the insights.


It also make total sense as for game balance. Red Court infected have already enough drawbacks. If they lose it and kill someone, they essentially lose their character.

And now that you say it, I remember why magic is such a problem when it comes to breaking the laws. Magic is like investing your beliefs and essentially a part of yourself. When you use that to cause break one of the laws, you essentially corrupt yourself.

Title: Re: Addictive Saliva and the 4th Law of magic
Post by: Drachasor on January 28, 2011, 04:21:47 PM
To get Lawbreaker you have to be using Sponsored Magic, Channeling, Evocation, Ritual, or Thaumaturgy.  No other supernatural power qualifies you to get it (and some don't think Sponsored Magic qualifies you either...though I do).
Title: Re: Addictive Saliva and the 4th Law of magic
Post by: vultur on January 28, 2011, 05:15:48 PM
Specifically, this is addressed in the section on the Fourth Law in YS (page 241, "Non-Spellcasting Enthrallment" subheading). "For the purposes of game rules, such powers are already assumed to have assessed the costs for holding such sway over another's mind."

And it says that "usually this is a case where the Accords trump the Laws" -- meaning, I guess, that a Red Court Infected would be liable to the Fellowship of St. Giles for any mis-use of their powers. I'm not sure how an unaffiliated Infected would be treated; probably ignored unless they were a threat, or killed if they were. (Though any Infected who was likely to be a threat would probably be a vampire very quickly anyway...)

From a world logic perspective, Addictive Saliva is basically just a "biological" secretion (though a weird alien one, and possibly not following known laws of biology) -- using it isn't an act of raw will in the way spellcasting is; it doesn't have that component of having to really believe in what you're doing. Similarly for Emotional Vampire -- it's a "natural" power of that sort of being, and it seems that at times the power can operate without really intending it to (Thomas says so in TC).

---

Sponsored Magic is a trickier case. When Harry's adding Hellfire or Soulfire on as basically a supercharge to magic he already has, it can clearly break the Laws.

 But I'm not sure if a Changeling, or somebody like Fix who becomes a Faerie Knight without previous spellcasting ability, using raw Seelie or Unseelie Magic, would get Lawbreaker stunts or not. Again, I don't think the Wardens would get involved (they might conceivably mess with a Changeling who didn't have "backing" from their parent's Court, I guess)...
Title: Re: Addictive Saliva and the 4th Law of magic
Post by: sinker on January 28, 2011, 06:02:51 PM
Quote from: vultur on January 28, 2011, 05:15:48 PM
But I'm not sure if a Changeling, or somebody like Fix who becomes a Faerie Knight without previous spellcasting ability, using raw Seelie or Unseelie Magic, would get Lawbreaker stunts or not. Again, I don't think the Wardens would get involved (they might conceivably mess with a Changeling who didn't have "backing" from their parent's Court, I guess)...

I would think that they would step gingerly around Changelings simply because of the potential for offense. It's possible the parent (or the parent's court) may ignore the changeling's death completely. However if they did take offense then they would be well within their rights to demand retribution.

For that matter the same could apply to the red court as well. They seem to hold value in their "offspring".
Title: Re: Addictive Saliva and the 4th Law of magic
Post by: MacShidhe on January 28, 2011, 06:13:22 PM
I'd think that since the Laws of Magic specifically apply to the White Council, the advantages and disadvantage would only apply to those they claim jurisdiction over so would not apply seelie and unseelie magic or addictive saliva.  However, from a role playing standpoint, I'm pretty sure the Wardens would react to them in a similar way.
(click to show/hide)


Sam
Title: Re: Addictive Saliva and the 4th Law of magic
Post by: Bruce Coulson on January 29, 2011, 12:14:49 AM
The Laws of Magic apply to mortal spellcasters.  Even a part-vampire is no longer mortal, either under the Accords or game mechanics.  Therefore, a infected Red Court is not subject to the Laws.  (They will probably be subject to a lot of other things, if they continue to use their saliva to enslave people...but the White Council does not have any legal or moral authority over their actions.)  Prior to the Vampire War, attacking a vampire solely for using their powers would be a violation of the Accords, and treated as such.   (Which wouldn't prevent a wizard from reporting such actions to the vampire's faction; either Red Court or St. Giles; and letting them take action.)
Title: Re: Addictive Saliva and the 4th Law of magic
Post by: toturi on January 29, 2011, 12:23:30 AM
I am not even sure Lawbreakers would apply to non-mortal(human) spellcasters.
Title: Re: Addictive Saliva and the 4th Law of magic
Post by: Drachasor on January 29, 2011, 12:40:30 AM
Quote from: vultur on January 28, 2011, 05:15:48 PM
Sponsored Magic is a trickier case. When Harry's adding Hellfire or Soulfire on as basically a supercharge to magic he already has, it can clearly break the Laws.

 But I'm not sure if a Changeling, or somebody like Fix who becomes a Faerie Knight without previous spellcasting ability, using raw Seelie or Unseelie Magic, would get Lawbreaker stunts or not. Again, I don't think the Wardens would get involved (they might conceivably mess with a Changeling who didn't have "backing" from their parent's Court, I guess)...

Harry never breaks a law using Hellfire or Soulfire.

Imho, if you have "free will" (positive net refresh), then you can definitely be affected by Lawbreaker as a game mechanic.  So if you use magic to kill someone or break another law, then it twists and warps you.  Whether or not the White Council can come after you is another matter.  Of course, this only applies to true magic, the stuff you have to really believe in to make work.  Channeling, Thaumaturgy, Evocation, and Ritual are all definitely that way.  I'd say sponsored magic is exactly the same way though; you still have to believe in the effect to make it work, it's just that the sponsor can help handle some of the more complicated details (e.g. they do the math for you).  If sponsored magic was someone else doing the believing for you, then you wouldn't have to worry about magic using skills like discipline and conviction.  Now, very often sponsored magic means the White Council isn't going to go after you, anymore than they'd overtly go after a Red Court Vampire who went about breaking the laws (they might send the Blackstaff at such a person though), but that's a different thing from the game mechanic itself which represents a stain on the soul (or whatever you have passing for one...and all players have souls..well, their characters do at least).

If Fix went around burning humans alive with magic, it would stain him, no matter how good Summer Magic made them smell afterwards.

Anyhow, addictive saliva and stuff like that aren't something you have to truly believe in to make work.  You can have doubts, misgivings, etc when you use them and they work just fine.  As such they are very different from the sort of thing that invokes Lawbreaker.