Author Topic: Law Talk (Read 127554 times)

Sanctaphrax · « **on:** February 02, 2013, 06:45:15 AM »

Deadmanwalking · « **Reply #1 on:** February 03, 2013, 05:03:39 AM »

Excellent idea. Basically bumping to keep it available.

My opinions (by order of discussion linked above):

1. It's using magic with intent that grants Lawbreaker. So you have to intend someone to die to break the First Law, intend to transform them to break the Second, etc. Motivation (ie: why you're doing it) on the other hand, couldn't matter less. The Wardens may not be quite this forgiving, though.

2. Depends on X. Sometimes.

3. Yes, it is. It may be from outside you, but it still requires you to will it to happen. To believe in it completely, and that's what twists you. In game terms, it still uses your Conviction and Discipline, not your sponsor's, so it still grants you Lawbreaker. The Wardens may have a hard time prosecuting, though, depending on your patron.

4. Depends on X. And, IMO, how you perceive X. Morgan could probably kill Thomas without getting Lawbreaker because he sees him as a monster. Harry couldn't. This doesn't extend to actual humans, who you get Lawbreaker for killing regardless of how monstrous you think they are.

5. Depends on how they work. Harry's force rings? Probably. A Warden's Sword? No.

6. Very little. Mostly only to repair existing damage, and even then only with consent. You can look as much as you like if you have consent, though.

7. Depends on the spell, and mostly on Intent. See my mentions of intent above.

8. On the Third Law yes (because of how it's worded), on the Fourth Law a little bit sometimes (again, based on wording) on any of the others, no, not at all.

9. No, they explicitly do not. You've paid that price as part of buying the power in question. The rest of these are just my personal opinion, but this one is straight from the creators of the game.

Magicpockets · « **Reply #2 on:** February 03, 2013, 09:07:28 AM »

Here's my take on it. As always, it's my personal opinion:
1. Agree with Deadmanwalking.

2. Mostly no.

3. Depends on the kind of sponsored magic. Generally no, since the twisting, in my understanding, requires the caster to use his own internal magic for it to corrupt. Is the caster a lawbreaker in the eyes of the White Council? Likely. Does he acquire lawbreaker powers, making further attempts at breaking the laws stronger? I doubt it.

The one exception to this rule would IMO be Kemmlerian Necromancy, since it isn't so much sponsored by an external source but rather something taught to a wizard. Also, it requires Evocation+Thaumaturgy, implying that it only expands your natural abilities, not grant you actual spellcasting when you lack it.

4. My personal take:

True Mortals: Yes
True Believers: Yes
Mortal Emissary of Power: Depends. For Denarians, I'm inclined to say No
"Mortal Freaks" (Werewolves, practitioners, minor talents): Yes
"Halfbreeds" (Changelings, Scions): Yes, as long they don't have the Living Dead or Human Guise Powers (or similar)
Red Court Infected/White Court Virgins: Yes
White Court Vampires: No
All other supernatural characters: No

5. Depends. Warden swords are created with the express purpose of not violating the first law, but an enchanted item designed to mindrape someone might be pushing it. When in doubt, I ask myself whether a mundane item of the same type could have accomplished the same. E.g. Magical Gun/Sword: Fair game; Reanimation potion: not so much.

6. As long as no stress, consequences, blocks or maneuvers are used, it would be fine.

7. I'd rule that the lawbreaker bonus only applies to actions intended to further break the law.

8. I'm inclined to say no, unless self-inflicted.

9. No, because it only applies to spellcasting powers.

narphoenix · « **Reply #3 on:** February 03, 2013, 04:18:13 PM »

1. The line is: is your spell the last act of will between the kill or no? Intent doesn't matter, per:

Quote from: jimbutcher

But if the substance of the consequences of the act itself does not have its own inherent quality of good or evil, then how can the /intentions/ behind it determine a similar quality? "Really, I was only trying to provide a better quality of life for my family and my employees. It wasn't my intention to destroy that particular species of flower in the rain forest that cures cancer." "I was just trying to give those Injuns some blankets. It wasn't my intention to expose them to smallpox and wipe out hundreds of thousands of innocent people." "I just wanted to get that book finished while working two jobs and finishing a brutal semester of grad school. It wasn't my intention to screw up the name of Bianca's personal assistant whose death had motivated her to go all power hungry to get revenge on Harry."

There's some old chestnut about good itentions serving as base level gradiant on an expressway that goes somewhere, but I can't remember the specifics right now. While I agree that the /intentions/ of the person taking action are not without significance, they carry far less weight than the /consequences/ of that action.

So, to use an example that's been used before: if you Forzare someone off of a cliff, Lawbreaker. If you Forzare someone into the oath of an oncoming car (with a driver) no Lawbreaker, but the Wardens won't be happy.

2.

WCV: No. Elaine was extremely willing to roast Pirscilla like a Thanksgiving turkey, and she's trying to avoid White Council attention.

Red Court Infected/White Court Virgins: Hm. Probably. They have enough humanity to resist The Hunger, so.

Denarians: Hell no (pardon the pun). Luccio, ie, the Warden Captain, was willing to (and did) roast those fuckers.

Fae Knights: Hm. Before I would have said yes, but in light of CD and the revelation of the archetype thing, I have become more inclined to say no.

Minor Practitioners: Yes.

Were-things: Depends on form. If shapeshifted, no. If human, yes.

Pure Mortals, Wizards, and True Believers: Yes

5. If they are magical effects, yes (Like Harry's force rings). If they are not (like the Warden Swords), no.

6. If you subvert their will, 4th Lawbreaker. If you see inside their head without permission, 3rd Lawbreaker. If they gave you permission, no Lawbreaker (otherwise, Harry would be guilty of violating the 3rd Law in WN)

7. No opinion.

8. Not on the 1st or 2nd Law. 3rd Law yes. 4th Law maybe. 5th, 6th, and 7th, no.

9. No.

Theonlyspiral · « **Reply #4 on:** February 04, 2013, 04:20:18 PM »

1. I'd have to look at the situation. Sometimes it wold be appropriate (Pushed onto a freeway, and that kind of skirting) but if there is an unintended consequence then definitely not.

2. Case by case basis.

3. I'd have to say Yes. 100%.

4. The big thing I'm sure of is that for things like Denarians or other beings who are possessed it would be a huge cluster-cuss to adjudicate in play.

5. Things like the Warden Sword is a no. Force Rings, full on Love Potions? Yes.

6. I really am not sure...I'd say something like a Jedi Mind Trick would be ok, but nothing stronger.

7. The big thing for me is Intent. If you try to break a la and believe in it, then you get it. On the other side, if it's an accident then we might see mitigating factors.

8. Yes.

9. I really had never given it much thought.

InFerrumVeritas · « **Reply #5 on:** February 04, 2013, 05:02:55 PM »

1-How does accidentally killing people with magic work?
In our game, killing with magic requires will to gain Lawbreaker. However, the Wardens largely don't care and will head chop, unless you can get a respected member of the council to go for bat for you. Note that this doesn't mean that you can throw fire all over the place and say "well I didn't mean to kill them so I shouldn't have to take Lawbreaker…" This is for "oops, the falling building killed a fireman as he was evacuating people, an hour after I left" and other accidental, highly unlikely, and difficult to foresee events.

2-Does X count as killing with magic?
Very context dependent. Table should come to agreement before it comes up.

3-Is Sponsored Magic subject to the Laws?
Yes, unless you're compelled to kill. If you're sponsor is forcing you to do it, it doesn't taint your soul. Otherwise, it does. The Wardens may or may not be in a position to prosecute depending on your sponsor.

Related note, most Sponsored Magic practitioners don't hex when not throwing magic around (but could hex when actively casting). The magic isn't inside them, just available.

4-Are Enchanted Items subject to the Laws?
Yes.

5-How much can you mess with somebody's head without breaking a Law?
You can repair magical/psychic damage only (that is, consequences caused by Supernatural Powers). Looking is okay with consent, and only with consent (as this is not an invasion). Putting to sleep, inciting emotional response, etc are all fine. Dealing a mental consequence breaks the Law hard (as it is lasting and relatively permanent damage if untreated).

6-How do the laws work with spells that are intended to break the law but don't, or that are in a "grey are" Law-wise?
This is two different questions. If you intend to break the law but don't, you don't get Lawbreaker, but the Wardens will come after you if they find out. "Grey areas" will usually warrant Warden suspicion and possibly action, but won't earn you Lawbreaker. You only get the bonuses from Lawbreaker stunts when doing something which would earn you that stunt in the first place.

7-Does consent matter?
Depends on the Law. 1-No; 2-Temporary transformations don't break the law with consent, permanent transformations always do because they destroy the target's self, healing is always fine; 3-Yes, you can look but don't touch with consent; 4-Enthralling means you're taking consent away, so no; 5-No; 6-No; 7-No.

8-Do the Laws matter to non-spellcasting powers?
The Laws matter, but I would never make you take Lawbreaker. If you're human and flavoring your powers as coming from Magic, I'd make you change an aspect. If you're not human, who cares? The Wardens'll try to kill you when politically expedient either way.

Theonlyspiral · « **Reply #6 on:** February 04, 2013, 05:07:12 PM »

Quote from: InFerrumVeritas on February 04, 2013, 05:02:55 PM

4-Are Enchanted Items subject to the Laws?
Yes.

Even Warden Swords? If they Grant Lawbreaker then what is the point? Why don't they just use guns and be over it?

Taran · « **Reply #7 on:** February 04, 2013, 05:51:59 PM »

Quote from: Theonlyspiral on February 04, 2013, 05:07:12 PM

Even Warden Swords? If they Grant Lawbreaker then what is the point? Why don't they just use guns and be over it?

Haru had an interesting point on warden swords. If you're using it as a sword to kill someone, then it isn't magic but your own innate swordsmanship that is killing. If you use the magic of the sword to boost the damage, then you're using magic. There's some debate about whether the weapon 6 counts as an unnaturally sharp sword that, narratively, only comes into play when you activate it, or if it's just a normal sword that only becomes unnaturally sharp when you activate it.

The point though is this: If I have a magic staff that can shoot off a weapon 5 fire attack 1/session, and you use it to kill someone, then you're using it to break the law. If you use that same staff to bash someone's head in, then it's not magic and therefore no Lawbreaking.

Theonlyspiral · « **Reply #8 on:** February 04, 2013, 06:21:01 PM »

So with the Weapon 3 it would be cool, but the Weapon 6 would count as lawbreaker? That seems reasonable. Personally I like the IoP version better myself.

InFerrumVeritas · « **Reply #9 on:** February 04, 2013, 06:28:20 PM »

Quote from: Theonlyspiral on February 04, 2013, 06:21:01 PM

So with the Weapon 3 it would be cool, but the Weapon 6 would count as lawbreaker? That seems reasonable. Personally I like the IoP version better myself.

That's my reasoning. If it's just a normal sword, it's fine. You always wouldn't get Lawbreaker if you beat someone over the head with a crystal ball. You only get Lawbreaker if using Magic in an enchanted item, not the item itself.

Theonlyspiral · « **Reply #10 on:** February 04, 2013, 07:18:14 PM »

Quote from: InFerrumVeritas on February 04, 2013, 06:28:20 PM

That's my reasoning. If it's just a normal sword, it's fine. You always wouldn't get Lawbreaker if you beat someone over the head with a crystal ball. You only get Lawbreaker if using Magic in an enchanted item, not the item itself.

So how do people feel about Items of Power?

Sanctaphrax · « **Reply #11 on:** February 04, 2013, 10:17:32 PM »

Narratively speaking, warden swords are not activated. They're always that sharp.

The 3 times/session thing is a mechanical approximation.

At least, that's how I remember it.

PS: What do you guys think we should do with this thread? Should it be stickied, put on the Resources board, or just left to sink and then linked to when Law fights start?

Tedronai · « **Reply #12 on:** February 04, 2013, 10:29:38 PM »

Quote from: Theonlyspiral on February 04, 2013, 07:18:14 PM

So how do people feel about Items of Power?

The treatment of IoPs for purposes such as this depends, imo, almost entirely on the narrative source of the particular IoP.
If the narrative of the IoP includes the use of the holder's own will in the same manner as with innate spellcasting capabilities, then using that IoP to kill in that manner may very well justify Lawbreaker (and would similarly benefit from any resultant bonuses, even if the mechanical representations of the powers granted by the IoP do not include conventional spellcasting powers).
This is the same treatment that I give to 'non-spellcasting powers' used as mechanical approximations of narrative spellcasting powers, such as 'Breath Weapon' used to represent a highly-practiced offensive spell that can be cast repeatedly without exhausting the Practitioner.

Quote from: Sanctaphrax on February 04, 2013, 10:17:32 PM

PS: What do you guys think we should do with this thread? Should it be stickied, put on the Resources board, or just left to sink and then linked to when Law fights start?

Resources Board would be my preference.

Hick Jr · « **Reply #13 on:** February 04, 2013, 11:34:01 PM »

I'd recommend stickying it or putting it on the Resource board. Letting it sink is letting it be forgotten. And oh my god i'm going to avoid this thread and everything it discusses like the plague.

Theonlyspiral · « **Reply #14 on:** February 04, 2013, 11:42:37 PM »

Quote from: Hick Jr on February 04, 2013, 11:34:01 PM

I'd recommend stickying it or putting it on the Resource board. Letting it sink is letting it be forgotten. And oh my god i'm going to avoid this thread and everything it discusses like the plague.

I think we should sticky it here. More Exposure. Also I was excited to have a friendly and spirited debate about the laws...

Author Topic: Law Talk (Read 127554 times)

Sanctaphrax

Law Talk

Deadmanwalking

Re: Law Talk

Magicpockets

Re: Law Talk

narphoenix

Re: Law Talk

Theonlyspiral

Re: Law Talk

InFerrumVeritas

Re: Law Talk

Theonlyspiral

Re: Law Talk

Taran

Re: Law Talk

Theonlyspiral

Re: Law Talk

InFerrumVeritas

Re: Law Talk

Theonlyspiral

Re: Law Talk

Sanctaphrax

Re: Law Talk

Tedronai

Re: Law Talk

Hick Jr

Re: Law Talk

Theonlyspiral

Re: Law Talk