So, you think killing someone with magic kills the caster a little due to a magical link?

Just guessing really, but that would seem to work.  It can't be based on the morality of the action or the caster because we've said a well intentioned spell that kills will taint the wizard and conversely using magic to unjustly kill an innocent non-human doesn't result in a taint.

The only other option I can think of would be that the system itself has some kind of built-in intelligence.  That is, magic is aware or the results of its use and the taint is punishment for breaking it's somewhat arbitrary rules.

The WoJ on the subject is that intent has no bearing on dark magic corruption.  If you do something bad for the right reasons, you're corrupted.

Interesting.  I take "doing something bad for the right reasons" as knowing what you're doing but feeling that it's justified or believing that it's the "least wrong" option available.  The first scenario, killing in self defense seems to fall into this category.

I'm more questioning scenarios where there isn't any reasoning involved. e.g. A human is killed accidently and perhaps the practitioner isn't even aware of it after the fact.  Still black magic?

Or, conversely a practitioner casts what if fully intended to be lethal black magic but fails to kill the target due to external interference.  (Say, an entropy curse cast at a human that is redirected to a black court vamp...)  Not black magic due to incompetence?

Another interesting scenario.  If Butters had killed a human with a magic device during his Batman phase.  The actual power is coming from Bob.  So, not black magic and Butters doesn't experience any corruption?
 

This is mostly related to the first law and how it relates to black magic.  It's come up several times that the corrupting effect of black magic is largely due to twisting creative forces to commit murder and believing it's the right thing to do.  Given that, it seems like there may be three components to consider.

Intent - What is the practitioner trying to do?
Fact - What is the actual result?
Knowledge - Is the practitioner even aware of the result?

So, here are a few scenarios.  Fairly easy to determine if a situation is a first law violation, a little harder to know if the result is black magic, with the self inflicted damage that entails. 

• Killing in self defense - Pretty much Harry's situation with Justin.  First law violation and black magic.  Clearly redeemable with support
• Accidental killing - In battle, throwing fire at a red court vamp (RCV) who ducks.  A human friend behind it is hit and killed.  Technically a first law violation but is it black magic?
• Killing a human by mistake - In battle, throwing fire at what you mistakenly believe to be a RCV who is killed.  The target was actually a vanilla human.  Neither you or anyone else knows this was the case.  First law violation yes, black magic?
• Killing a human by mistake v2 - Same situation, but after the battle you check the body and find that they were human.  First law violation yes, black magic?
• Accidental Killing unawares - Using force magic to blow open a door.  A person behind it is struck and killed.  The wizard leaves without discovering they've killed someone or even that someone was there.  Again, first law violation, but black magic?
• Trying to kill a human and failing - In a bar, someone hits on you date.  You respond with a fireball that's intended to be fatal.  They duck and run, surviving.  Not a first law violation, seems like it might be black magic?
• Same situation, but the fireball lands killing the target.  Turns out, unbeknownst to the wizard, the "victim" was a RCV out hunting for a meal.  Not a first law violation, seems even more like it might be black magic?

 

What do you think?