The Dresden Files > DFRPG

A few questions on Lawbreaker

<< < (2/4) > >>

Moriden:

--- Quote ---Subduing someone magically then killing them can't be a Lawbreaker because that's how Warden's operate.
--- End quote ---
this is flawed logic

JustinS:

--- Quote from: Walker_Blade on April 25, 2010, 10:07:44 PM ---these were just a couple of questions that I came up with while rereading the series.

In grave Peril Harry summons a large number of ghosts/specters into existence and directs them at Bianca to kill her.  How is this different from corpstaker's spectral soldiers and how does it not earn him a lawbreaker stunt?

and a more general question:  do you get lawbreaker if you use magic to guarantee that someone will be killed but not actually kill them with the magic? (binding someone into paralysis and then letting them drown or just shooting them)

--- End quote ---

Honestly, I suspect that Wardens do the 2nd all the time when they execute someone.
If you have the sorcerer captive, and are giving them a hearing, you do make sure to bind them so they don't try to kill you and escape.

Your deciding to stick a sword into them, even when they are helpless is not a direct consequence of use of magic, or involve a use of magic.

It still makes you someone who killed a person...

Ghsdkgb:

--- Quote from: Moriden on April 25, 2010, 11:25:04 PM ---this is flawed logic

--- End quote ---
It's Warden logic.

Moriden:

--- Quote ---this is flawed logic
It's Warden logic.
--- End quote ---

To expand, the logic holds true for weather or not you have to face social sanctions, but not weather or not you get the stunt. personally i would have given warden Morgan the lawbreaker ;first stunt probably at -2. Im rather certain half the reason he was so fixed in his ways , overly judgmental, and obsessed with killing harry was because of how this stunt had warped his mind over the years.

paul_Harkonen:
My understanding of the Lawbreaker stunt is whether your intention in using the magic is to kill, or restrain.

In the case of drowning, the goal of the spell is to kill, the decision to cast and kill are simultaneous.

In the case of the Wardens, the goal of the spell is to restrain only, the killing is a separate decision.

That said, I'm not even certain that the drowning example is a violation of the first law.  The issue is that the process of spell casting requires that you truly believe in the effect.  It's a dark dark gray area to be sure, but the distinction between deeply and intimately believing in the immediate death of a human being, and restraining a human being so they can be allowed to die.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page