Rewriting Lawbreaker Powers

[nadia.skylark]

So, I don't really like the Lawbreaker power because I feel like it discourages people (or at least discourages me) from playing a character like Harry or Molly, who broke a Law once but is trying to reform. If you're not breaking whatever Law a bunch in game, then it's just wasted refresh. I was thinking about just treating breaking the Laws like an extreme consequence, but then I thought that it might work better if I expanded the Lawbreaker power to give bonuses to things that weren't just breaking the Laws. For example, Lawbreaker (1st) would give a bonus to all violent magic, not just First Law violations. Do you think that that would work, or are there problems with it that I haven't thought of?

[backseat_adventurer]

Okay, first I have to admit my group and I are pretty new to the DFRPG.  We're still working the kinks out of our interpretation of the rules.  Now that disclaimer done, I'll get back to answering your question.

The Lawbreaker powers do appear to be very black and white.  Do this and you are forever stained etc.  This can seem rather limiting but as you've said in the novel canon, law breakers can seek redemption or to better themselves.  I think, however, it's a bit of a toss-up about how successful they can be. 

Molly walks a pretty grey line with her use of mind magic and then stepped over the line in Ghost Story.  Harry killed Justin and has been a mostly good boy since, although, he has deployed potentially lethal magical force against humans.  That it didn't end up lethal... well there was quite the element of luck.  Also, his resolve to protect his love ones has been strongly implied to know no bounds. 

Does this mean once a Lawbreaker always a Lawbreaker?  That's more complicated.

Perhaps we should also consider what Lawbreaker means from a more than mechanical POV.  I've heard it described in the novels and online, that the power represents the practitioner's belief they have the Right to do what they did.  To mess with someone's mind, to take a life etc.  I think this makes sense.  Until a practitioner can truly shed that belief, not just admit they did wrong, and truly decide never to do it again, they would be Lawbreakers.  Both Molly and Harry acknowledge what they did was wrong but they'd both do it anyway if they thought it justified.

For our table, removal of the Lawbreaker power means lots of RP, change of an Aspect and repayment equal to the Lawbreaker refresh with GM permission.  If they break the same or a different Law, they get the old Lawbreaker power and a new one.  This may mean the character gets permanently taken out as an NPC.

Of course, your mileage may differ.  You get to decide if or when someone no longer deserves the Lawbreaker power.

As for 'adding on' to the Lawbreaker power, I'd strongly suggest you avoid that.  To expand the power suggests that magic innately condemns actions other than law breaking.  It also adds a mechanical bonus greater than what Refinement generally gives.  Essentially, it's a floating 'specialization' to all types combat magic, to use your example.

Everyone would want to break laws with that kind of reward.  Don't forget that the Lawbreaker power is meant to act as a mechanical penalty by removing a player's ability to tailor their character by choosing where to invest refresh, raising the risk of taking the character out and on the RP level, opening them to punishment from the Council. 

If you do want to be able to facilitate a redemption arc with a character, that's fine.  Just work out with the player how to do it and what rules or thresholds you want to employ.  Maybe ask the player to make their Lawbreaking and search for absolution be expressed in their Aspects.  Have them invoked.  The Lawbreaking should be made meaningful to the character and thus player, not just a convenient bonus with minor RP consequences.

[Deadmanwalking]

I apply Lawbreaker to two things it does not officially apply to:

#1: Things that should break the law, but don't due to a technicality (ie: killing nonhuman foes, reading someone's mind consensually, raising animal zombies, etc.) receive the same bonus as actually breaking the Law. This is slightly less broad than allowing Lawbreaker (First) on all violent magic (since it only allows it on killing specifically), but I've found it perfectly reasonable.

#2: Predicting or analyzing the behavior of others with the same Lawbreaker stunt (or other appropriate people at GM discretion). Molly demonstrated this in Turn Coat, and it's potentially a very useful little bonus.

These seem like a good way to handle it to me, and useful without being overpowered. And, frankly, I'm not sure 'everyone wanting it' on a mechanical level is a bad thing. There should be some temptation to falling to the dark side, after all...

[nadia.skylark]

Don't forget that the Lawbreaker power is meant to act as a mechanical penalty by removing a player's ability to tailor their character by choosing where to invest refresh,

This is what I have a problem with. I don't like the idea of having to deal with a penalty because I want to role-play a specific type of character. As a lawbreaker, my character already has to deal with narrative consequences (wardens chasing them, doom of Damocles, etc.) and compels to the changed aspect. I don't like the idea of being forced to spend refresh to no benefit.

As for 'adding on' to the Lawbreaker power, I'd strongly suggest you avoid that.  To expand the power suggests that magic innately condemns actions other than law breaking.

The idea wasn't that it condemns other actions, but that it benefits actions that are related. For example, the Lawbreaker (5th) power according to RAW would give no benefit to raising an animal from the dead, only humans. I would expand it to encompass animals as well, plus other forms of necromancy. That way the character still has to deal with the temptation to use necromancy, but there are differing levels of consequences. Animal necromancy, for example, wouldn't earn you another count of Lawbreaker, but might mean that the Wardens try to chop your head off unless you can come up with a really good reason for it (or might encourage them to investigate you and find out your first instance of Lawbreaking).

It also adds a mechanical bonus greater than what Refinement generally gives.  Essentially, it's a floating 'specialization' to all types combat magic, to use your example.

This is what I was worried about. Do you think it would be more balanced if it was only +1 power to attack spells? This would seem to fit narratively by encouraging you to use your power more recklessly, and fallout would be a good source of compels to have you 'accidentally' kill someone else, or to, for example, burn a dead body and have the wardens come after you thinking you've killed someone else.

I apply Lawbreaker to two things it does not officially apply to:

#1: Things that should break the law, but don't due to a technicality (ie: killing nonhuman foes, reading someone's mind consensually, raising animal zombies, etc.) receive the same bonus as actually breaking the Law. This is slightly less broad than allowing Lawbreaker (First) on all violent magic (since it only allows it on killing specifically), but I've found it perfectly reasonable.

#2: Predicting or analyzing the behavior of others with the same Lawbreaker stunt (or other appropriate people at GM discretion). Molly demonstrated this in Turn Coat, and it's potentially a very useful little bonus.

Great ideas!

And, frankly, I'm not sure 'everyone wanting it' on a mechanical level is a bad thing. There should be some temptation to falling to the dark side, after all...

 

[backseat_adventurer]

This is what I have a problem with. I don't like the idea of having to deal with a penalty because I want to role-play a specific type of character. As a lawbreaker, my character already has to deal with narrative consequences (wardens chasing them, doom of Damocles, etc.) and compels to the changed aspect. I don't like the idea of being forced to spend refresh to no benefit.

Honestly, I think I see it as something more akin to what Changelings can do.  They can RP their Choice and gain access to other powers but it potentially takes them out of play.  This is the practitioner/wizard version of surrendering themselves for power.  I think it makes sense there is a mechanical refresh penalty.  Besides, there are benefits to the power, so it's not really a big loss.  Power at a price, right?

The idea wasn't that it condemns other actions, but that it benefits actions that are related. For example, the Lawbreaker (5th) power according to RAW would give no benefit to raising an animal from the dead, only humans. I would expand it to encompass animals as well, plus other forms of necromancy. That way the character still has to deal with the temptation to use necromancy, but there are differing levels of consequences. Animal necromancy, for example, wouldn't earn you another count of Lawbreaker, but might mean that the Wardens try to chop your head off unless you can come up with a really good reason for it (or might encourage them to investigate you and find out your first instance of Lawbreaking).

I can see what you are getting at about the temptation of power etc. but I think that is better dealt with by invoking aspects and good RP.  Giving a concrete mechanical benefit to a wider range of actions or targets for one refresh... feels imbalanced.  More about that below.

This is what I was worried about. Do you think it would be more balanced if it was only +1 power to attack spells? This would seem to fit narratively by encouraging you to use your power more recklessly, and fallout would be a good source of compels to have you 'accidentally' kill someone else, or to, for example, burn a dead body and have the wardens come after you thinking you've killed someone else.

I think it's still too broad.  All attack spells, on all possible targets is huge.  Evocation grants 3 elements.  Break a single law and that's essentially a +3 power for only one refresh and a few RP consequences.  For things like necromancy or biomancy... it gets a little harder, too.  Raising a zombie via thaumaturgy technically isn't an attack spell, so what is the equivalent? 

Also, as I was saying before, the power reads "Gain a +1 bonus to any spellcasting roll whenever using magic in a way which would break the specified Law of Magic".  This suggests it's the breaking of the Law itself that grants the bonus.  If the Law isn't broken, you don't get the power, therefore, you shouldn't get the bonus for targeting non-humans.  Unless somehow the scope of the Law itself widens if you break a law, which we now it doesn't. 

Really, the 'human only' catch and linking it to the act that breaks the law, are the prime ways Lawbreaker is limited.  Removing those limitations in a game that has combat with non-humans as a core part of play is problematic.  I do still feel that the Lawbreaker powers give a nice, situational bonus, representing the temptation of power, with an RP penalty which can be handled by negotiation with your GM.  Tacking on too much more makes it far too overpowered for a one refresh power.  It's almost the power equivalent of a stunt.

[Sanctaphrax]

I think both the extreme consequence approach and the broadened power approach can work well. Really, Aspects do all the heavy lifting when it comes to representing corruption.

Exactly how powerful a broader interpretation of Lawbreaker is depends on the Law. Since Lawbreaker only gives +1 for 1 Refresh and Refinement gives +2, it's probably appropriate for Lawbreaker to be a bit broader. But someone with Sponsored Magic (Outside) boosting every single spellcasting roll with Seventh Lawbreaker is probably still getting too good a deal, especially when you consider that they're getting to ignore the pyramid system. On the other end of the spectrum, the guy who broke the Sixth Law probably isn't getting much bang for his buck.

With all that in mind, I think it's best to write out the details of each proposed broadened Lawbreaker before passing any judgements.

[Deadmanwalking]

Really, the 'human only' catch and linking it to the act that breaks the law, are the prime ways Lawbreaker is limited.  Removing those limitations in a game that has combat with non-humans as a core part of play is problematic.  I do still feel that the Lawbreaker powers give a nice, situational bonus, representing the temptation of power, with an RP penalty which can be handled by negotiation with your GM.  Tacking on too much more makes it far too overpowered for a one refresh power.  It's almost the power equivalent of a stunt.

Uh...Lawbreaker is pretty weak without broadening. Like, probably the single weakest power in the game. +1 or +2 Control when breaking the Law is a nice bonus when it applies, but even with the way I widen it it's not nearly as wide as you're implying.

I mean, let's take the First Law, since that's probably the most generally applicable. Sure, my version is +1 Control on all Elements...but it's also only on attacks, not maneuvers or blocks of any sort, and only when you're trying to kill. That's not broader than +1 Control to one element. It's not even broader, in practice, than +1 Offensive Control with one element. Both of which are only 1/2 a Refresh rather than the full -1 Refresh Lawbreaker grants. It does stack, of course, but still, there's a reason I threw in the predictive bonus.

And that's my broadened version. The version that gives +1 control only to kill humans specifically? Absurdly and unconscionably weak for a full Refresh. Heck, that's weak for a Stunt, never mind a Power. A Stunt to give +1 to hit humans with an attack skill is plausible...but add the killing restriction and that's weaker even than most other Stunts. And Powers are rather intentionally more impressive than Stunts.

[nadia.skylark]

I think it makes sense there is a mechanical refresh penalty.  Besides, there are benefits to the power, so it's not really a big loss.  Power at a price, right?

Well, that's the problem. If I'm roleplaying a character like Harry, I'm not breaking the Laws, so I get no bonus. Therefore, there are no mechanical benefits to spending the refresh.

I think it's still too broad.  All attack spells, on all possible targets is huge.  Evocation grants 3 elements.  Break a single law and that's essentially a +3 power for only one refresh and a few RP consequences.

Well, refinement is +2 to anything to do with the elements it's boosting. This would be +1, and even though it applies to all the elements, it only boosts attack spells, not shields or maneuvers. Also, it's explicitly +1 power, so you still need to roll to control it.

For things like necromancy or biomancy... it gets a little harder, too.  Raising a zombie via thaumaturgy technically isn't an attack spell, so what is the equivalent?

The equivalent is, it doesn't have one. If it's not an attack, it doesn't get the Lawbreaker (1st) bonus.

Also, as I was saying before, the power reads "Gain a +1 bonus to any spellcasting roll whenever using magic in a way which would break the specified Law of Magic".  This suggests it's the breaking of the Law itself that grants the bonus.  If the Law isn't broken, you don't get the power, therefore, you shouldn't get the bonus for targeting non-humans.  Unless somehow the scope of the Law itself widens if you break a law, which we now it doesn't. 

I think that what should give you the bonus is doing things that put you in the same mindset as breaking the Laws. Breaking the Laws is supposed to change the way you think, so I figure it makes sense.

But someone with Sponsored Magic (Outside) boosting every single spellcasting roll with Seventh Lawbreaker is probably still getting too good a deal, especially when you consider that they're getting to ignore the pyramid system.

True, but I'm pretty sure that if you use the RAW version of Lawbreaker (7th), you're still getting the bonus every time you use your sponsored magic, since using it is reaching beyond the Outer Gates.

With all that in mind, I think it's best to write out the details of each proposed broadened Lawbreaker before passing any judgements.

Do you have any suggestions for Lawbreaker (2nd-4th, & 6th)? I've already written up my idea for Lawbreaker (1st), and I figure Lawbreaker (5th) should just be +1 to necromancy since necromancers are supposed to be scary powerful and you'll get a lot more consequences from the White Council even if you avoid technically breaking the Laws.

[g33k]

Rather than fiddle with "Lawbreaker" maybe just take an Aspect?  Something that represents being on-the-edge, but not calling upon the specific Lawbreaker rules, and thus not engaging the play-balance issue.

Remember, the "Laws of Magic" label covers two things:

• Did you violate the metaphysics/psychology of the Dresdenverse?  Have you ACTUALLY taken that first step down the slippery slope?
• Do the Wardens think you did?  Are they watching you like a hawk, and you may get WardenSword'ed at any moment?

Just because the Wardens are riding you like you're the only horse in town, doesn't mean you actually DID anything wrong; and just because you did, doesn't mean they know about it!

Take an Aspect like:
"I walk the Line"
Invoke it for benefit when you deploy possibly-excessive violence, or grey-area mind-magic, etc etc etc.
GM can invoke it to bring in a Warden out of the blue, to compel you toward that grey-area magic, etc.

[backseat_adventurer]

Uh...Lawbreaker is pretty weak without broadening. Like, probably the single weakest power in the game. +1 or +2 Control when breaking the Law is a nice bonus when it applies, but even with the way I widen it it's not nearly as wide as you're implying.

I mean, let's take the First Law, since that's probably the most generally applicable. Sure, my version is +1 Control on all Elements...but it's also only on attacks, not maneuvers or blocks of any sort, and only when you're trying to kill. That's not broader than +1 Control to one element. It's not even broader, in practice, than +1 Offensive Control with one element. Both of which are only 1/2 a Refresh rather than the full -1 Refresh Lawbreaker grants. It does stack, of course, but still, there's a reason I threw in the predictive bonus.

And that's my broadened version. The version that gives +1 control only to kill humans specifically? Absurdly and unconscionably weak for a full Refresh. Heck, that's weak for a Stunt, never mind a Power. A Stunt to give +1 to hit humans with an attack skill is plausible...but add the killing restriction and that's weaker even than most other Stunts. And Powers are rather intentionally more impressive than Stunts.

I suppose I've been playing with far too many players who would completely take advantage of that.  Since most opponents in combat are non-human they can intend to kill, take advantage of the bonus, but not 'really' break the Law another time.  Then it's a mad scramble to engineer situations to prevent that.  Our table is currently pretty reasonable but I suppose I've learned a few knee-jerk habits.

If it works out in play, I will take it on.  I just don't want to reward bad behavior

[backseat_adventurer]

Well, that's the problem. If I'm roleplaying a character like Harry, I'm not breaking the Laws, so I get no bonus. Therefore, there are no mechanical benefits to spending the refresh.

LOL, I think that's my point too.  The Lawbreaker power just seems like it's supposed to be a punishment of sorts, as well as a Tantalus.  I think I was looking at it like that because I've had a few problem players in the past.  I do see how you wouldn't get much mileage if you weren't going warlock.  It's rather like Marked Like Power, which seems set up to both be an advantage and a detriment depending on the situation but mechanically it's just awkward.

The equivalent is, it doesn't have one. If it's not an attack, it doesn't get the Lawbreaker (1st) bonus.

That's exactly the problem.  If you give something nice to the 1st Law, you have to do something nice for the rest of them.

Do you have any suggestions for Lawbreaker (2nd-4th, & 6th)? I've already written up my idea for Lawbreaker (1st), and I figure Lawbreaker (5th) should just be +1 to necromancy since necromancers are supposed to be scary powerful and you'll get a lot more consequences from the White Council even if you avoid technically breaking the Laws.

I'd love to hear suggestions.  Most of the areas of magic the Laws prohibits or limits are pretty broad.

[Deadmanwalking]

I suppose I've been playing with far too many players who would completely take advantage of that.  Since most opponents in combat are non-human they can intend to kill, take advantage of the bonus, but not 'really' break the Law another time.  Then it's a mad scramble to engineer situations to prevent that.  Our table is currently pretty reasonable but I suppose I've learned a few knee-jerk habits.

I'm not sure what the problem here is, honestly. Sure, they'll use the bonus and get a +1 to hit nonhuman foes pretty regularly...but they spent a Refresh, getting an actual bonus out of it seems totally legit to me.

If it works out in play, I will take it on.  I just don't want to reward bad behavior

This version has the nice bonus of making people who've taken Lawbreaker significantly more inclined to murdering their enemies of all sorts, since they're better at it. That's pretty accurate to Harry Dresden's characterization, and seems very appropriate to me thematically. In many ways, they're being less rewarded and more incentivized to continue with the murder.

[backseat_adventurer]

I'm not sure what the problem here is, honestly. Sure, they'll use the bonus and get a +1 to hit nonhuman foes pretty regularly...but they spent a Refresh, getting an actual bonus out of it seems totally legit to me.

This version has the nice bonus of making people who've taken Lawbreaker significantly more inclined to murdering their enemies of all sorts, since they're better at it. That's pretty accurate to Harry Dresden's characterization, and seems very appropriate to me thematically. In many ways, they're being less rewarded and more incentivized to continue with the murder.

I'd say that the problem I was worrying about was more that they'd add a few more Lawbreaker powers.  Then they have a +2 or +3 to any attack they make, so long as they're aiming to kill. I'd probably intervene and have the Council or a Big Bad arm wrestle them into a less overt use of their magic but it's still remarkably powerful.

As for the comparison between Lawbreaker and an evocation specialization, with a specialization, you get a +2 bonus to use upon one element and for control and/or discipline.  With a couple of Lawbreaker powers, it's to every element you have.  That is a lot of flexibility with the minor catch being that you have to go for lethal blows.

Now, the original post was talking about a character that is on the redemption track.  That probably wouldn't be a problem but for some players?  That might get interesting.

[nadia.skylark]

I'd say that the problem I was worrying about was more that they'd add a few more Lawbreaker powers.  Then they have a +2 or +3 to any attack they make, so long as they're aiming to kill. I'd probably intervene and have the Council or a Big Bad arm wrestle them into a less overt use of their magic but it's still remarkably powerful.

I'm pretty sure this problem has a built-in solution: the stronger they are, the more likely they are to get killed by the White Council. Players abusing Lawbreaker powers? Throw a warden hunting party at them. They dodge that? Well, whatever problem they're trying to solve has also attracted the attention of the White Council. They kill the wardens sent after them? Well, now they've attracted the attention of Blackstaff McCoy, and so on.

[Sanctaphrax]

And that's my broadened version. The version that gives +1 control only to kill humans specifically? Absurdly and unconscionably weak for a full Refresh. Heck, that's weak for a Stunt, never mind a Power. A Stunt to give +1 to hit humans with an attack skill is plausible...but add the killing restriction and that's weaker even than most other Stunts. And Powers are rather intentionally more impressive than Stunts.

It can be useful at high Refresh. The pyramid system puts a premium on cap-breaking bonuses.

But yeah, it's pretty terrible at the levels people are actually meant to play at.

I'd say that the problem I was worrying about was more that they'd add a few more Lawbreaker powers.  Then they have a +2 or +3 to any attack they make, so long as they're aiming to kill.

That is extremely expensive refresh-wise and not really worth it unless you're having cap issues.

Do you have any suggestions for Lawbreaker (2nd-4th, & 6th)?

The second could probably be stretched to include a variety of maneuvers. Evocation can't really transform people but it can put Aspects on them and if you squint that's similar.

The fourth is powerful if you allow mental evocation attacks, which Evil Hat seems to. You shouldn't, though.

The third and sixth, unfortunately, are pretty useless for evocation and pretty narrow for thaumaturgy. You could have them broaden the Lawbreaker's evocation a bit; perhaps Sixth Lawbreakers can use time as an evocation element.

Might be worth thinking about compressing multiple Laws into single powers. You could connect them all to the same Power, or just merge 3+4 and 6+7.

I'm pretty sure this problem has a built-in solution: the stronger they are, the more likely they are to get killed by the White Council. Players abusing Lawbreaker powers? Throw a warden hunting party at them. They dodge that? Well, whatever problem they're trying to solve has also attracted the attention of the White Council. They kill the wardens sent after them? Well, now they've attracted the attention of Blackstaff McCoy, and so on.

The solution to a player taking over the story by being stronger than the other PCs is not to have them take over the story even more.

Besides, Compels are supposed to make things like "somebody wants me dead" into mixed blessings rather than outright problems.