Laws of Magic

[Llayne]

So pardon me if this is actually somewhere else on the boards, but a search didn't show it.

In Turncoat they dicuss that the Laws were designed to limit the power a wizard can have in mortal politics. I think it was a discussion between Harry and Luccio after she mentioned his Mother.

So were they made because breaking the laws leads you to become evil, or made to prevent wizard interference in mortal politics? If it's the second, why would there be lawbreaker stunts? Why would you start to turn evil?

Is it just because the RPG was made started pre Turncoat?

[Deadmanwalking]

No, it's because that's only part of the story. Re-read Proven Guilty and Harry's discussions about the Fourth Law and why breaking it is bad. There are several other references to magic twisting you as well (Harry's anger-management discussion with Murphy in White Night also comes to mind).

[Llayne]

I know there are other references and other mentions. All the 'if you beleive' stuff. I just have trouble reconciling all of that with the conversation in Turncoat.

If using the laws would turn you evil, then that would be why they were in place. Period. Why even mention politics?

[ahunting]

Your crossing wires. Yes the Breaking the Laws of MAGIC, because of the nature of belief twists whoever does it.

The other issue your discussing the idea of not taking ideological stands and/or getting involved in human politics isn't a law of magic,
its a rule of the councils, to prevent internal breaches as nationalist interests could trump the greater work of the council. For what that worth though clearly there some gray area or shockingly the white council might be a little Hypocritical(gasp!). 

[DFJunkie]

Yeah, that wasn't a discussion about breaking the Laws of Magic, that was a discussion about why the council doesn't take sides in political debates.  A silly, illogical discussion of course (why does stopping the Nazis require the destruction of Germany?  You tell me.)

[GoldenH]

I wonder if that speech was just because of Luccio's mindbender. It's contradictory for wizards to be against wielding temporal power when they have no trouble wielding supernatural power. During that whole section I was like "Yeah, okay, if you actually believed that you'd have set aside your power and let it wane."

[ahunting]

Not really, if you think about it. Calling in mortal involvement is the equivalent of dropping a nuke as cannon says.
The council is made up a collection of people who are hundreds of years old. That means, you talking about people
with vast experience. Politics is the ugliest job ever, and becoming a world leader opens you up to some deep scrutiny, about the time they find out your Birth Certificate is faked and then discover a picture of you eating dinner with someone from the civil war you will quickly discover you have just opened a whole new can of worms.

Now that isn't to say the don't wield power in mortal society they just do it through economic means, and not so much political means.
Economics is still very powerful, just not as direct and a lot harder to pin down.

[Llayne]

Just found Turncoat and reread that section because it was bothering me.   

It essentially came down to 'the laws of magic limit the influence a wizard can have on mortal politics because it limits/stops the use of black magic, which is the most effective means of influencing mortal politics.' (paraphrasing)

So Deadman was right, they are set up against black magic, which in turn limits the power a wizard can weild in politics.

The greater part of the discussion was Margaret's desire to attach moral or ethical restrictions to the laws, which would in turn have wizards picking sides and tear apart the council.

I guess I should have just found the book in the first place.