Playing Lawbreaking characters

[Quantus]

Wanderer,

Setting aside the flavor aspects (free-will, morality, etc) of the Lawbreaker rules, are you ok with the mechanics themselves? 

Sounds like the idea of having a PC turn NPC is a particular sticking point, IMO getting rid of that one would only risk increasing the workload on you as the DM who'd have to be more agile to account for more possible extremes. 

Would the "madness" effects of the Black Magic use be more palatable if it's described as "warmping magic to those  specific extremes creates Cracks in the Universe allowing Lovecraftian-esk "outsider" influence to seep in?   (That's one popular fan-theory for the universal issue with Black Magic).  Or how about instead focus on the "addiction" side it, like Taran described?

[Shaft]

Would the "madness" effects of the Black Magic use be more palatable if it's described as "warmping magic to those  specific extremes creates Cracks in the Universe allowing Lovecraftian-esk "outsider" influence to seep in?   (That's one popular fan-theory for the universal issue with Black Magic).  Or how about instead focus on the "addiction" side it, like Taran described?

With this in mind, you could actually make Lawbreaking an equivalent to Sponsored Magic.  It lets you build a "cheater" who learned spellcasting the quick and easy dark side way like Victor Sells, or it could be a boost to a legitimate wizard like Harry.

[Troy]

Why not just use the rules to play an urban fantasy game which does not take place in the Dresden Universe? Or, if it does take place in the Dresden Universe, just say, "the only consequences for Lawbreaking will come from the White Council ... if they find out."

If you disagree with the entire premise of the Laws of Magic, how magic works, and Lawbreaking's effect on a character, etc, then don't even use it. Why go to all the trouble to acknowledge Lawbreaking and create something to put on a person's character sheet when it would just be easier to remove the whole thing from the game entirely. Nothing about the game changes (other than the setting) if you utterly remove the Laws of Magic, or mechanics for breaking them, from the game.

[Wanderer]

Well, I can certainly see appropriate reasons why dealing with Outsiders (or their equivalent) or messing with the timestream may be bad for the Universe, even in the kind of setting I like to have, so I'm open-minded to have cosmic mechanisms in place that deal negative consequences for that kind of shenanigans. On the other hand, I'm absolutely averse to any kind of equivalent for stuff like lethal magic, body or mind manipulation, or necromancy.

Aside from getting in the way of my preferred playstyle, it smacks too much of validating conventional Abrahamic morality as true cosmic law, and I really hate it. Anything that goes too far in RPG or fiction to make a theist vision of the world factually true and 'right' gets me annoyed, uncomfortable, and if anything sympathetic with Luciferian rebellion against Heavenly tyranny. Even if magic and the supernatural get added to a setting, I very much prefer them to remain impersonal or at least neutral about ethical issues, either in the sense of them not taking sides or of all stances being represented by appropriate agents and archetypes playing on a level playing field. Even with magic, the cosmos should remain aloof and uncaring, with no apparent meaning or purpose apart from what sapient minds project on it.

Either there are no true gods, or they are fallible Ascended sapients and/or incarnations of archetypes, and pretty much all conceivable examples of the latter exist at once, including all historical major pantheons. Either there is no real Supreme God, or it is very much a distant, unknowable, uncaring Cosmic Watchmaker, impersonal First Principle, or pantheist All. The Universe at large really does not care or take sides about what sapients do to themselves and each other, either with mundane tools or supernatural powers, nor it makes any real difference whether something gets done with one's hands or one's mind.

Therefore, I'm not averse to having some kind of control mechanism in place to deal with outlandish violations of the stuff the first five Laws of Magic deal with, such as out-of-control magical serial-killers, mind-rapists, or soul-stealers, but it should absolutely be a social, legal one, same as for the equivalent mundane crimes. In other words, I'm OK with the White Council or any equivalent body establishing a code of law to deal with egregious magical crimes and enforcing it with more or less the same efficiency as mundane law enforcement. Of course, only in the case such a Code provides and allows for any sensible justifications such as necessity, self-defence, open combat or duel, consent of the subject, and the like, and cares about issues such as purpose and consequences. In this context, I assume even plot-threatening stuff such as mind-reading or controlling important NPC may be dealt with as a violation of magical law.

[Wanderer]

Why not just use the rules to play an urban fantasy game which does not take place in the Dresden Universe? Or, if it does take place in the Dresden Universe, just say, "the only consequences for Lawbreaking will come from the White Council ... if they find out."

If you disagree with the entire premise of the Laws of Magic, how magic works, and Lawbreaking's effect on a character, etc, then don't even use it. Why go to all the trouble to acknowledge Lawbreaking and create something to put on a person's character sheet when it would just be easier to remove the whole thing from the game entirely. Nothing about the game changes (other than the setting) if you utterly remove the Laws of Magic, or mechanics for breaking them, from the game.

Well, this was basically my stance as well, except I thought it might be appropriate to keep the canon version of Lawbreaker as an optional perk for those characters that specialize in certain kinds of magic, and get additional power for it at the cost of some refresh. I certainly see reason why certain mages may get a specialization in stuff like combat magic, mind-manipulation, body control, or necromancy. As long as it remains an optional skill specialization, nobody is forced to pick it because they occasionally or even regularly use that kind of magic, and it has no special 'cosmic' meaning for the setting, I'm good with it.

[Cadd]

My specific gripe with the Lawbreaker powers as they stand, is that while the Refresh/Free Will thing is thematic, I feel that in action it leads to an inversion of how the books describe warlocks trying to walk the straight and narrow, such as Harry and Molly.

Lawbreakers are usually described as more powerful than those with the same amount of training/experience, but fighting urges to resort to lawbreaking magic. Meanwhile by RAW a Lawbreaker PC will not be able to pick up as many Refinements (or anything else enhancing their magic) as a non-lawbreaker PC at the same power level. This means that in any situation besides breaking the same law, they will actually be weaker than a non-lawbreaker character.

[potestas]

in all sincerity your issue isnt with the game you have a hate for Christianity and or anything that might resemble it however remotely. Unfortunately for you the writer of the books used some of these concepts in his books and they have been transmitted to the game. Its an easy fix just ignore the rules no need for all the anger.

[Wanderer]

in all sincerity your issue isnt with the game you have a hate for Christianity and or anything that might resemble it however remotely. Unfortunately for you the writer of the books used some of these concepts in his books and they have been transmitted to the game. Its an easy fix just ignore the rules no need for all the anger.

I make no mystery of the fact that dealing with fiction or games that make Abrahamic religion (especially of the fundamentalist kind) factually true and morally right in terms of how the Universe works makes me very annoyed and uncomfortable, to the point I may have  serious difficulties playing or reading/watching them. E.g. from memory, the author's enthusiastic validation of Medieval Christian thought and morality in the series is why I was never able to read much of Christopher Stasheff's A Wizard In Rhyme, despite my love of fantasy; the setting's favoritism for Abrahamic monotheism I why I have serious trouble playing Steve Jackson Games' In Nomine, unless perhaps with demon or ethereal characters rebelling against Heavenly tyranny; and Judeo-Christian influence on the WoD games' morality systems made them a major and recurrent source of annoyance and controversy for me, short of extensive houseruling. As it concerns the Dresdenverse itself, it seems clear to me in all likelihood I'd only be able to read and enjoy the series if I can make a very concerned and successful effort to ignore the Christian elements you speak of in the setting. Fortunately, the author did not include such elements in other series I enjoyed, such as the Codex Alera. Admittedly, it is usually easier to houserule a RPG game than to make one's reading or watching headcanon of a book, movie, or TV series.

[Quantus]

I make no mystery of the fact that dealing with fiction or games that make Abrahamic religion (especially of the fundamentalist kind) factually true and right in terms of how the Universe works makes me very annoyed and uncomfortable, to the point I may have very serious difficulties playing or reading/watching them. E.g. from memory, the author's enthusiastic validation of Medieval Christian thought and morality in the series is why I was never able to read much of Christopher Stasheff's A Wizard In Rhyme, despite my love of fantasy; the setting's favoritism for Abrahamic monotheism I why I have serious trouble playing Steve Jackson Games' In Nomine, unless perhaps with demon or ethereal characters rebelling against Heavenly tyranny; and Judeo-Christian influence on the WoD games' morality systems made them a major and recurrent source of annoyance and controversy for me, short of extensive houseruling. As it concerns the Dresdenverse itself, It is by now clear to me I'd only be able to read and enjoy the series if I can make a very concerned and successful effort to ignore the Christian elements in the setting.

I dont know most of those examples personally, but that's... a pretty broad definition of objectionable content.  Urban Fantasy as a whole might be a tough realm to navigate. 

For what it's worth, Jim has stated several times that in the Dresden setting All religions and Myths are present and represented, and has said that the main reason he's not focusing more on other religions (eastern ones or the Hawaiian mythology are the examples I recall off-hand) was because he was far less personally familiar with those religions and would want to do the research and come up to speed on them better before giving them much screen time, simply so that he could do so properly, not wanting to be disrespectful to somebody's religion out of ignorance. 

[Taran]

in all sincerity your issue isnt with the game you have a hate for Christianity and or anything that might resemble it however remotely. Unfortunately for you the writer of the books used some of these concepts in his books and they have been transmitted to the game. Its an easy fix just ignore the rules no need for all the anger.

I make no mystery of the fact that dealing with fiction or games that make Abrahamic religion (especially of the fundamentalist kind) factually true and right in terms of how the Universe works makes me very annoyed and uncomfortable, to the point I may have very serious difficulties playing or reading/watching them. E.g. from memory, the author's enthusiastic validation of Medieval Christian thought and morality in the series is why I was never able to read much of Christopher Stasheff's A Wizard In Rhyme, despite my love of fantasy; the setting's favoritism for Abrahamic monotheism I why I have serious trouble playing Steve Jackson Games' In Nomine, unless perhaps with demon or ethereal characters rebelling against Heavenly tyranny; and Judeo-Christian influence on the WoD games' morality systems made them a major and recurrent source of annoyance and controversy for me, short of extensive houseruling. As it concerns the Dresdenverse itself, It is by now clear to me I'd only be able to read and enjoy the series if I can make a very concerned and successful effort to ignore the Christian elements in the setting.

I just take it with a grain of salt.  When I read fantasy based on Greek Mythology, I don't assume the author is trying to force polytheistic concepts down my throat. I just assume that that's the way the Universe works.  I just finished reading Percy Jackson with my son and there's no assumption that there's a monotheistic god and I don't really feel there should be.

It's fantasy afterall.

[Wanderer]

For what it's worth, Jim has stated several times that in the Dresden setting All religions and Myths are present and represented, and has said that the main reason he's not focusing more on other religions (eastern ones or the Hawaiian mythology are the examples I recall off-hand) was because he was far less personally familiar with those religions and would want to do the research and come up to speed on them better before giving them much screen time, simply so that he could do so properly, not wanting to be disrespectful to somebody's religion out of ignorance.

As I said upthread, I have no problem with fantasy that makes all religions and myths true and (potentially) represented on a level playing field (in practice narrative constraints makes it very likely only an handful or so of pantheons can get adequate coverage), typically including the Abrahamic, Greek, and Norse ones for reasons of familiarity and popularity. But the Laws of Magic, the setting's treatment of non-human sapience, and the view they represent and validate of free will and the way the universe work are the problem. If Jim had avoided picking such elements, I'd probably have no real issue with the books. Angels and demons being major characters and players in the cosmic game is absolutely not the issue, here or in other kinds of fiction. 

[Wanderer]

I just take it with a grain of salt.  When I read fantasy based on Greek Mythology, I don't assume the author is trying to force polytheistic concepts down my throat. I just assume that that's the way the Universe works.  I just finished reading Percy Jackson with my son and there's no assumption that there's a monotheistic god and I don't really feel there should be.

It's fantasy afterall.

True. But I may remark that in my experience as fantasy based on pagan myths usually goes, it often tends to make the gods' rule of the cosmos a morally neutral at best issue, a Might Makes Right or Lesser Evil unavoidable fact rather than a statement that this is how the Universe ought to be. And I do not necessarily tend to assume the author's narrative validation of religious tropes I dislike means they personally support those features or wish to shove them down my throat. They may have all kinds of practical reasons, such as familiarity, marketing intent, or just artistic whimsy.

[potestas]

I just take it with a grain of salt.  When I read fantasy based on Greek Mythology, I don't assume the author is trying to force polytheistic concepts down my throat. I just assume that that's the way the Universe works.  I just finished reading Percy Jackson with my son and there's no assumption that there's a monotheistic god and I don't really feel there should be.

It's fantasy afterall.

this how i work it, its supposed to be fun.

Wanderer ever try ars magicka the church plays a huge role in that game and it is by far the best magic system i have ever come across

[Quantus]

As I said upthread, I have no problem with fantasy that makes all religions and myths true and (potentially) represented on a level playing field (in practice narrative constraints makes it very likely only an handful or so of pantheons can get adequate coverage), typically including the Abrahamic, Greek, and Norse ones for reasons of familiarity and popularity. But the Laws of Magic, the setting's treatment of non-human sapience, and the view they represent and validate of free will and the way the universe work are the problem. If Jim had avoided picking such elements, I'd probably have no real issue with the books. Angels and demons being major characters and players in the cosmic game is absolutely not the issue, here or in other kinds of fiction.

Fair enough.  If you are interested, you might enjoy taking a look at some of the things the author has said on the matter with regards to the setting over in the WOJ section.  Some of the takeaways that I got which might interest you are that he's very aware of the discrepancies in the Laws of Magic (particularly in their secular enforcement) and what might be argued as the actual morality of the situation (Here's one good post he made on the Forums to that topic).  It's a slow thing over the course of the series, but exploring that discrepancy, challenging the thinking behind the traditionalist Black&White views, etc are recurring themes (albeit not necessarily heavy-handedly or always front and Center to the casefile) but Im enjoying it. 


PS  Hey, you know Wanderer, You mentioned you hadnt gotten terribly far in the novels; did you get to Death Masks and the introduction of the other Knights of the Cross?  I think you'd like Sanya, the agnostic Champion of Heaven.  Probably also Shiro, Holy Champion of Elvis.   

[g33k]

... I think you'd like Sanya, the agnostic Champion of Heaven ...

IIRC, Sanya claims to be an atheist Knight of the Cross; only when pressed does he (reluctantly) admit that he might actually be agnostic ...