ParanetOnline
The Dresden Files => DFRPG => Topic started by: iago on July 13, 2007, 03:14:44 PM
-
The Fourth Law of Magic is: Never enthrall another.
http://www.dresdenfilesrpg.com/news/archives/2007/07/post_1.php
-
Of all the Laws, this is the one we've seen in the most detail in the books, thanks to PG. (While First Law infractions are more common, they are also more clear-cut and unambiguous.) Because we've already got a prime grey-area example from the books, and have already had over a year to hash out the implications elsewhere on the board, I find it difficult to come up with anything really worthwhile to say, other than that you've lived up to my high expectations and hit the nail on the head. (That's the one downside to consistently doing an excellant job - people come to expect it of you!)
-
This is the most explicitly defined Bad Thing To Do, because it's been discussed in so much detail in the books. The First Law comes a close second but is less precisely defined; all there is is the "it's like adding I am a murderer into your psyche and letting it take root" from SF.
The Second Law ultimately stems from both of these, and so is clearly Not Good for the same reasons.
The Third Law is initially more about a 'social' rather than 'spiritual' danger. To me, "merely" reading minds doesn't automatically stain your soul, for lack of any better way of describing it; it's more about accepting the easiness of it and the sort of person you become as a result of doing it more and more. Like the First Law, but without the killin', but still a slippery slope to the Black.
The law on necromancy (the Sixth?) is much the same, to me... embracing necromancy leads to thinking of live people as potential useful dead people, and that, again, is Not Good.
Contacting Outsiders carries the suggestion of SAN loss... and so doing it would be A Bad Idea.
The ban against time travel would seem to carry the least amount of "spiritual backlash" with it... if, of course, you consider the potential to destroy the entire universe no big thing. The Law in particular seems far more about good sense than turning you to the Dark Side.
And there's my brief Law-shaped nutshell :)
-
The last paragraph and sentence made me think bout some potentially interesting situations. Depending on whats changed it would obviously force other changes to occur in the character. Since they cant use drugs they become addicted to pain or become suicidal as they want it but cant have it cause they're too afraid, repulsed, ect or they can't pig out so they get hooked on drugs, can't watch TV anymore become a fanatic reader and go on the forums at jim-butcher.com all day long, you get the idea. Depending on who its done to and where the story is it could be used to swing it in a new direction as a character with a brand spanking new personality really changes things when it comes to decision making. The only thing I'm not clear on is in situations like these are there predetermined parameters of what we can do with the players actions as GM or is basically our choice? Within reason of course.
-
If I had a character who wanted to do this, I could make a huge legal argument about the difference between enthralling and using magic on the mind. The examples given seem like they could be transferred just as easily to surgery, with any instance of compulsions changed to "chainsaw".
Surgery is bad because treating cancer by cutting it out with a chainsaw kills people. You'll sever arteries and break bones, leaving your patient a crippled, bleeding mass on the operating room table.
There's also the gray area of removing a compulsion.
-
If I had a character who wanted to do this, I could make a huge legal argument about the difference between enthralling and using magic on the mind. The examples given seem like they could be transferred just as easily to surgery, with any instance of compulsions changed to "chainsaw".
Surgery is bad because treating cancer by cutting it out with a chainsaw kills people. You'll sever arteries and break bones, leaving your patient a crippled, bleeding mass on the operating room table.
There's also the gray area of removing a compulsion.
The real problem with that analogy is that without practise and training, you aren't going to become a skilled surgeon, and you wouldn't want to make the attempt without suitable equipment. But there's no way to practise mental surgery on dead bodies or fakes like one does in surgical training, and (because of this) there isn't any tradition or practise with the level of skill to train others in this. (After all, that kind of knowledge hass to ultimately come from practical experience at some point in the past...) And without experience or training, to extend the metaphor, attempting surgery with crude unsterilised equipment isn't something you'd want to risk - the comparison isn't quite as blatent as your chainsaws, but is certainly far from safe and probably often fatal.
-
The real problem with that analogy is that without practise and training, you aren't going to become a skilled surgeon, and you wouldn't want to make the attempt without suitable equipment. But there's no way to practise mental surgery on dead bodies or fakes like one does in surgical training, and (because of this) there isn't any tradition or practise with the level of skill to train others in this. (After all, that kind of knowledge hass to ultimately come from practical experience at some point in the past...) And without experience or training, to extend the metaphor, attempting surgery with crude unsterilised equipment isn't something you'd want to risk - the comparison isn't quite as blatent as your chainsaws, but is certainly far from safe and probably often fatal.
Animals have minds. So do vampires, ghouls, fairies, air spirits trapped in skulls, and all manner of non-humans.
-
Hmmm make my dogs afraid of my hamster ::). I see promise :P
-
Animals have minds. So do vampires, ghouls, fairies, air spirits trapped in skulls, and all manner of non-humans.
I doubt that the mind of a non-human works the same way.
To extend this metaphor do you want a Vet preforming brain surgery
-
Exactly. Practising on animals and then applying what you've learned to people would probably only make things even worse. Non-corporeal spirits would be too different. Creatures of the NeverNever, equally so.
-
Besides, anything sufficiently similar to a human mind to be good practise would also be subject to the same ethical issues - remember, even a nonhuman might be considered close enough to warrant a violation. (If I were GMing it, I'd say that it would count as experience if and only if it also counted as a violation for accumulating "ticks" and stunts.) Remember if SF, Harry tells the Shadowman that the Fourth Law prohibits bindind another against their will - referring to Kalsharrak the demon? If even that kind of monster is deemed to be protected, then the Fourth Law gets applied with a very broad brush indeed...
Of course, there's nothing to stop some beings being bound by their own will in various ways - a contract with various powers like the Denarians, a bargain with the Leanansidhe, the mantle of a Faerie Knight, an oath sworn on ones own power - we've seen many examples in the book. All of these do apply some degree of compulsion/obligation on the bound party, but he or she chose to accept them at the time, so free will is not compromised. I'm not sure whether the Swords of the Cross belong on the list or not - my impression of those is that no futher obligation is required after the choice to take up the sword - one merely has to keep making that same choice every day, and only those capable of doing so are given the option in the first place.
-
I doubt that the mind of a non-human works the same way.
To extend this metaphor do you want a Vet preforming brain surgery
It's not like an animal neurosurgeon can't perform neurosurgery upon a human (or vice versa (http://abcnews.go.com/2020/Health/story?id=1431035)).
Besides, how do you think brain surgeons practice? They don't just start on real patients.
Of course, there's nothing to stop some beings being bound by their own will in various ways - a contract with various powers like the Denarians, a bargain with the Leanansidhe, the mantle of a Faerie Knight, an oath sworn on ones own power - we've seen many examples in the book. All of these do apply some degree of compulsion/obligation on the bound party, but he or she chose to accept them at the time, so free will is not compromised.
So, as long as someone gives permission you're pretty much free to mess around with their mind,
-
I doubt that the mind of a non-human works the same way.
To extend this metaphor do you want a Vet preforming brain surgery
Hmmm well physiologically white court vamps are more less equal to humans so I'm sure their mental functions and thought processes aren't all that different. Creatures such as primates or spirits with similar thought processes could easily be used to practice on as they aren't human but their minds work more or less the same way. Not saying its something that should be done or that it would guarantee success while working with humans but it would mean at least a slightly better chance of success.
-
To be fair, the brain surgery analogy only goes so far. It's not a matter of gross brain structure but how the mind works... and the minds of non-humans, or even of White Court vamps, are different enough from those of regular humans that practising on them wouldn't get you anything more than angry Wardens on your ass.
-
While yes it might be hard to find a willing subject to practise on. But if you could find the notes of somone who already had used mind magic a lot of the work would be done for you.
Also a ghost could be a possible subject. They seem to have minds even if they are abit broken. Of course if a ghost has a mind they would probably be a little to human for most wizards to use.
-
Just to throw out some thoughts.
Enthralling, as I understand it means to bend someone to your will. To force your will onto their mind like some kind of mental handcuffs, no matter how gentle or how much they think they want it, would cause mental damage - probably the kind of thing that would snowball into something that would come to some form of insanity. Even if a person would want someone to take over, in no matter how small a way relieves them of responsibility for their actions. Acknowledgement of responsibility for ones actions is part of the whole of free will.
Rather than a brain surgeon the practitioner becomes the de-facto jailer in certain situations. Even in willing participants it wouldn't work. Some examples might be:
If I come to a wizard and say "I want to quit smoking but I just can't dredge up the will-power. Please make me quit smoking. It's killing me." The practitioner reaches into my psych and carefully takes away my urge to smoke. Sounds good right? But what he/she didn't know is that when I started smoking I did it to be like my mom, who also smoked. The smell reminds me of when I grew up and I find it subconsciously comforting. Now I don't smoke anymore. I also find myself feeling oddly uncomfortable talking about when I grew up as I can remember the comfort I got from my past but the smell that triggered the feeling is no longer something I enjoy. I stop talking to my mom (who may have quit smoking by now) because the acquiescence of my free will on the subject is chafing and she is associated with it. Can you see where this might go?
I come to a practitioner and say " I got bit by a dog one week ago and now I'm afraid of large dogs. Please take away that fear. I like dogs." He/she reaches in and takes away the fear but because I didn't work through it myself and did really want to not be afraid, I "help" the practitioner along and now I'm not afraid of any animal biting me and I decide I want to jump over the enclosure fence and pet the lions at the zoo because they look so soft and what the heck, what is everyone so afraid of anyway...
The brain surgeon analogy only works if most minds, like most brains worked in the same way. Medical science knows approximately where the speech and memory centers of the brain are - the basics of perception. The mind is something completely different, although some physical imbalances can cause similar mental instabilities, everyone has there own insecurities and hang ups that will manifest in unique ways. We won't even go into cultural differences, world paradigms, and ethical imperatives that could be bound up into something a practitioner might alter trying to help the person that would cause other domino effects.
Remember The Summer Lady was trying to stop an ongoing bloody war when she almost destabilized the world. She offered Harry her help in healing some of his mental wounds but without his reactions and coping mechanisms caused by those past traumatic events he would not be the quirky passionate guy we have all come to know and love.
The Fae are able to take things away without doing peripheral harm (remember Susan at the vampire party) - Good for them - but I don't believe we humans with our filters and flaws could do something like that so 'cleanly'. The practitioner reaches into my mind to help me stop smoking and finds out I don't like dogs because I was bit by one as a kid, which, as an animal lover, they see as a flaw so they fix that too...
As a soul gaze it might look like an infection in the soul - something small is poisoning the person slowly.
No I'm afraid that this particular law should not be bent and if a character does the GM could think of some bizarre reaction and the wardens should take notice. Not to say that people don't act bizarrely on their own but I think this one should be a stain on the practitioner’s psych as well.
Kristine
-
Here's an even more bizarre scenario.
A wizard is worried that in the heat of battle he might go too far, and any slip-up will mean Bad ThingsTM for the world (maybe he's fighting Denarians or something), so he enthralls himself so he can't touch one of the coins, or kill a human with magic.
Is this lawful?
-
Here's an even more bizarre scenario.
A wizard is worried that in the heat of battle he might go too far, and any slip-up will mean Bad ThingsTM for the world (maybe he's fighting Denarians or something), so he enthralls himself so he can't touch one of the coins, or kill a human with magic.
Is this lawful?
Before you ask that, you have to ask another question first:
Is this possible?
I suspect that one cannot enthrall oneself, any more than one can perform brain surgery on oneself - you are trying to change that part of oneself that is trying to make the change. If you tried it, if anythng did happen I suspect that it would go horribly wrong...
ON the other hand, this may be a case for GM adjudication.
-
I think since self hypnosys is possible that it should be possible form a compulsion in your own mind to not pick up a coin. Although you could still override your own work. Its your own house and you have keys, you know?
-
I have a persistent question in my brain about this Law: What about projective empathy?
Can I simply take my own emotions and shove them out at people or perhaps grab free floating emotional energy and manipulate it? Would these count as enthrallment? I'm talking about immediate emotion shifting, with nothing permanent to associate it with. What about if it were enchanted into a focus of some sort, like wards that radiate a low level fear/unease to act as a deterrent?
The character I'm writing up was a sensitive like Molly, but came into her own under the "gentle" tutelage of a Skavis connoisseur who enjoyed the taste of her pain. When her powers developed the first spells she taught herself were pretty nasty: "Castigare!" is a lash of psychic pain and a whispered "Dolore" gave the vampire a taste of his own medicine.
That stuff would probably get her labeled a warlock right quick, but what about a "Tranquillo" spell that washes an area in calm, maybe to stop a fight?
-
Grey area, for me, the way I'd run it. It's probably fine -- folks still have free will, they have the choice of what to do with what they feel -- but there are extremes of emotion where it could get pretty close to enthrallment, if not completely overcome it.
-
Thanks for the quick reply!
So would the White Council see something inherently wrong with using a mental paralysis or sleep spell versus kinetically binding someone with bands of force or an enchanted rope or something?
-
So would the White Council see something inherently wrong with using a mental paralysis or sleep spell versus kinetically binding someone with bands of force or an enchanted rope or something?
Would you risk even steping close to the line, if you felt the standard Warden response to people whom they though crossed the line involved a sharp sword and your neck?
-
Considering the character I have in mind is bad at enchantment and nowhere near Harry's strength with evocation, yeah. Especially in combat situations where the choice is either switch off the other guy's brain for a moment or die.
But yeah, I realize the dangerous line this character approaches. It's a deliberate point of tension on my part. I just wanted to see if, in people's opinions, this character would be Kill On Sight, or just Doom Of Damocles.
-
Considering the character I have in mind is bad at enchantment and nowhere near Harry's strength with evocation, yeah. Especially in combat situations where the choice is either switch off the other guy's brain for a moment or die.
But yeah, I realize the dangerous line this character approaches. It's a deliberate point of tension on my part. I just wanted to see if, in people's opinions, this character would be Kill On Sight, or just Doom Of Damocles.
I would think it would depend also on wheather the subject is 'harmed' mentaly or spiritually and that would be up to the GM. If The spirit is overcome to the point of the emotional field 'leaving a mark' then I would think this would throw up all kind of red flags but if it is something that turns the subject away without 'pushing' them too hard then no harm, no foul.
After all Harry used a potion on Susan (not on purpose albiet) that made her overcome with lust for an uncomfortable, dangerous 5 minutes without any lasting ill effects when it wore off, but when Molly pushed her friends to give up drugs (even when they wanted to) she acctually harmed their psychs.