Laws of Magic and sponsored magic

[fabulator]

So I've just had a small brainwave about the way the Laws of Magic, sponsored magic and the Accords interact with each other.  Consider that the Accords define specific 'groups' like the White Council, Summer and Winter, the Freeholding Lords, etc... and each of these groups then set their own policies for internal affairs while the Accords handle external relations.  The White Council is a group that strongly believes in the power of magic being shaped and guided by mortal will and thus set up the Laws of Magic to preserve that belief and to keep their own potential for destruction in check. These Laws have been around for so long and the White Council has been believing in them and in the effects of dark magic for so long that these beliefs have actually changed the way mortal practitioners interact with and use magic.  Its almost as if there are now two kinds of magic; mortal and non-mortal.  The White Council 'group' and mortal users are bound by the Laws because they believe that they are and they believe in the backlash black magic provokes and, for them, this belief is true. Other 'groups'; fae, dragons, vamps, whatever; do not suffer from Lawbreaker penalties because they don't really believe in the Laws and don't even consider the fallout from black magic. For them, the Laws just aren't real.  JB and Bob mention a number of times throughout the series that magic is a quirky thing that changes over time and I can readily imagine the focused belief of countless mortal practitioners changing things enough that, for them only, the negative effects of black magic (heck, even the concept of black magic) comes into being and they create the Laws to protect themselves.  Well, there you have it. Just my 2 copper.

[Saedar]

Yeah... There are more threads on this topic than probably any other.

I think the basic breakdown is:
1.) The Laws (and Lawbreaking) function only for mortal spell casters using mortal magic.
2.) The Laws as legalese can be applied to anyone, even if they aren't subject to the metaphysical drawbacks of Lawbreaking.
3.) The Laws (and Lawbreaking) apply to any mortal practitioner, regardless of the source of their magic.
4.) The Laws (and Lawbreaking) applies to everyone with free will (positive Refresh), period.
5.) The Laws (and Lawbreaking) applies to everyone. Period.

I'm more in line with #2. Granted, this doesn't take the Accords into consideration, but hey. It's a wacky world out there.

[Nyarlathotep5150]

The White Council 'group' and mortal users are bound by the Laws because they believe that they are and they believe in the backlash black magic provokes and, for them, this belief is true.

   The flaw I see in this philosophy is that a huge theme in the books is the predominance of wizards corrupting themselves, and going darkside because they had no proper training. They do dark magic (sometimes with very good intentions) without knowing about the laws, or that there even ARE laws. So it can't be their belief in the ramifications of dark magic that is warping them, because they are unaware that there are any ramifications.
   As far as the supernatural community being able to break the laws without repercussion, its brought up many times in the novels (and in the RPG books) that the Laws of magic only apply to mortal practitioners using those forms of magic on other mortals. You can use those forms of magic (except time travel and dealing with outsiders) on non-humans without fear. It is specifically a condition of the human soul that causes it to become tarnished by treating ones own species in such a way.
   So even if supernatural beings where beholden to those rules of conduct (which they shouldn't be, because even the ones that have souls don't have human souls), it would only apply to them using those forms of magic on their own species, not mortals.

[Drachasor]

Yeah... There are more threads on this topic than probably any other.

I think the basic breakdown is:
1.) The Laws (and Lawbreaking) function only for mortal spell casters using mortal magic.
2.) The Laws as legalese can be applied to anyone, even if they aren't subject to the metaphysical drawbacks of Lawbreaking.
3.) The Laws (and Lawbreaking) apply to any mortal practitioner, regardless of the source of their magic.
4.) The Laws (and Lawbreaking) applies to everyone with free will (positive Refresh), period.
5.) The Laws (and Lawbreaking) applies to everyone. Period.

I'm more in line with #2. Granted, this doesn't take the Accords into consideration, but hey. It's a wacky world out there.

I think 5 is technically true, but non-human-like beings that break the laws don't really suffer any ill-effects (it already is part of their nature in D-verse terms, however odd that actually is).  From a game mechanic standpoint, those beings don't have positive refresh anyhow, so "lawbreaker" has no effect really and doesn't matter (you can freely ignore it).  As a legal matter, the laws are usually only applied to humans, but I think if the White Council had the power, it would apply them to everything.  Since they AREN'T overflowing with god-like power left and right, they have to make do with what influence they do have, hence the status-quo and accords which bind what they can do.

[fabulator]

   The flaw I see in this philosophy is that a huge theme in the books is the predominance of wizards corrupting themselves, and going darkside because they had no proper training. They do dark magic (sometimes with very good intentions) without knowing about the laws, or that there even ARE laws. So it can't be their belief in the ramifications of dark magic that is warping them, because they are unaware that there are any ramifications.
   As far as the supernatural community being able to break the laws without repercussion, its brought up many times in the novels (and in the RPG books) that the Laws of magic only apply to mortal practitioners using those forms of magic on other mortals. You can use those forms of magic (except time travel and dealing with outsiders) on non-humans without fear. It is specifically a condition of the human soul that causes it to become tarnished by treating ones own species in such a way.
   So even if supernatural beings where beholden to those rules of conduct (which they shouldn't be, because even the ones that have souls don't have human souls), it would only apply to them using those forms of magic on their own species, not mortals.

I should have been a bit clearer in my post but I was trying to get across is that the belief of mortal wizards in the fallout from black magic and the effects of Lawbreaking is something that has been happening for a very long time. At this point, that belief has changed magic (or at least the way mortals interact with magic) to the point that even practitioners that have no idea about the dangers of black magic suffer the consequences. Other casters (faerie, monsters, etc..) do not share these beliefs and are thus not affected by them or the consequences of so many mortals believing the same thing for so many years.

[Nyarlathotep5150]

   Oh. I get what you're saying now.
   Well, in that instance I'd say that that's an entirely possible explanation, but its also not terribly relevant. I mean, No character in the game could ever prove that was the cause (beyond that they believe it to be true, and if they believe it to be true, then as far as their magic is concerned it is true).
   As far as I can see, having different characters have personal opinions about the nature of magic is great as a facet of that characters personality. But whether the repercussions of black magic are caused by a shift created by generations of mass belief, or the backlash of dangerous magic, or whether its the nature of the human soul and its always been that way... Its really just six of one/half dozen of another. The only thing anyone can say with certainty is, "Thats the way it is and theres nothing you can do to get around it."     

[fabulator]

Well what I'm trying to accomplish here is explain why beings like faeries, vampires etc... don't have to Lawbreaker stunts and things like that. Obviously they still have to suffer consequences for using black magic but for most of those creatures those consequences are part and parcel of being a monster; since they lack the capacity for true, meaningful choice and are beholden to their natures it doesn't really make much difference to them if they kill you with magic or with claws.  I'm also looking at a lot of people who are making Emissaries of Power and using sponsored magic and things like that and wondering why, how or if Lawbreaker should apply to them and I think not.  The user of sponsored magic still has obligations and suffers consequences for their actions and use of magic but those are all set by their sponsor and his/her/its agenda. Someone on the boards here, apologies for not getting the name, said something similar in that the equivalent of Lawbreaker for a character using Sponsored Magic:Seelie magic is coming closer to choosing to be Fae as opposed to human which I think makes perfect sense.  I guess what I'm setting out here is that I'm in the camp that sees the Laws and Lawbreaker stunts only applying to mortal practitioners (wizards, sorcerers, focused practitioners, etc...) who have free will (a positive refresh); all other groups either don't really care all that much (vampires) or have their own set of obligations (faeries).

[Drachasor]

Well what I'm trying to accomplish here is explain why beings like faeries, vampires etc... don't have to Lawbreaker stunts and things like that. Obviously they still have to suffer consequences for using black magic but for most of those creatures those consequences are part and parcel of being a monster; since they lack the capacity for true, meaningful choice and are beholden to their natures it doesn't really make much difference to them if they kill you with magic or with claws.

You aren't going to be able to come up with a solid foundation of reasoning, because the distinction between the "free will" of a creature like Mab and one like Dresden is pure sophistry, further muddled by incidents in the book such as Morgan giving Dresden a hard time over the treatment of Toot-toot (who isn't at all human and yet is somehow human-enough).

This is why I say you might as well make a GM call on whether it matters for a given creature or whether you want to deal with the mechanical bonuses or balance the NPC without those bonuses.

[Nyarlathotep5150]

   I agree that fearies using fearie magic shouldn't have to worry about consequences from breaking the laws, But emissaries of power should still be beholden to them (especially the sidhe knights, since part of the reason they exist is that they ARE mortal, and have mortal souls), not to the White Council, but to the internal twisting (and therefore the effects of the Lawbreaker power).
   

(click to show/hide)

Loyd Slate broke the laws constantly, and he was a pretty twisted (and therefore negative refresh) character

   I don't see how the source of the power really makes a difference. They are mortal, they use magic. Therefore the ways they choose to use that magic effects them. A case could be made for them to be given a "Free Pass" to actions taken due to Compels by their Patrons Agenda (those actions being forced upon them, and not their choice). But I wouldn't even give them that much, They wouldn't have those compels if they weren't using their powers, They effectively signed on as their patrons hitman. And the fact that the full ramifications of what they signed up for weren't spelled out isn't an excuse. They took the payment, now its time to pay their debts, and its nobodies fault but their own.
    plus the theme of the books, and the RPG seem to lean in that direction as well.
    As far as I'm concerned, if your character is definable as human, then it doesn't matter where his Magic comes from, hes beholden to the deleterious effects of Black Magic.
    There are some possible instances where an argument might be made that the character isn't "really" human

(click to show/hide)

Such as Kincaid, whatever he is. But we don't have enough definitive information to make a good judgment call on that... and he doesn't have magic anyway so it doesn't matter.

 

[Wyrdrune]

I think 5 is true, but only humans get their heads hacked off by the Wardens of the White Council :-)

[Nomad]

Actually, I thought Fae and Fae spo0nsored powers were incapable of breaking those laws.
Yes they "can" bend minds and enthrall and such but there has to be a hook (ie agreement / bargain) or they can't touch you at all.
Lord Slate the mortal with speed/toughness/str can torture and kill and do other nasty stuff but he can't do them with direct Fae Magic (unless the victim is sneared in a Fae bargain).

*This is my take on Fae and other netural supernatural groups vs Laws.

[Nyarlathotep5150]

Actually, I thought Fae and Fae spo0nsored powers were incapable of breaking those laws.
Yes they "can" bend minds and enthrall and such but there has to be a hook (ie agreement / bargain) or they can't touch you at all.
Lord Slate the mortal with speed/toughness/str can torture and kill and do other nasty stuff but he can't do them with direct Fae Magic (unless the victim is sneared in a Fae bargain).

*This is my take on Fae and other netural supernatural groups vs Laws.

   No. Fea can't kill you if you aren't bound to their court. That doesn't stop them from hurting you. As long as you live through it they can whatever they want to you. Nothing is stopping them from torturing you till you wish you where dead. Remember, when it comes to fea, there is no implied language. Exactly what it say is all that it covers.
     And that's an intrinsic part of fea psychology, not a limit on their supernatural powers. Its not that their magic can't kill you, its that they aren't ALLOWED to kill you, and if they aren't allowed, they can't even try to (thats how the Fea work. They can't act against their nature, they simply are what they are.)
      That infact is the very reason why they created the Knights, to get around that rule. The Fea are incapable of killing any mortal they don't "Own", but a human can do anything he wants. So they just take a mortal they do own, pump him up with alot of magic steroids, and sick him on whoever ticks them off.

[Drachasor]

For the purposes of the game it should work like this, imho:
A PC that breaks any law with spellcasting (sponsored or not), gets Lawbreaker.  Whether the White Council goes after them is a different matter.

NPC can have or not have lawbreaker as the GM wishes, depending on whether he is interested in the mechanical effect of Lawbreaker (the stats on the NPC sheet don't need Lawbreaker for you to treat him as one in terms of how he acts and others react to him).

That's by far the easiest way to go, with no room for abuse by players (accidentally or not), and not really any for the GM either -- an abusive GM is abusive no matter what.

[JosephKell]

Another lawbreaker discussion?  It must be Monday.   

[Deadmanwalking]

Hey, at least this one is in a thread designated for such discussions as opposed to derailing some other thread. Though a definitive answer from Fred and the other folks at Evil Hat would be awesome.