mindreading with a volunteer?

[DFJunkie]

If batman could read minds there would hardly be a need for detective-ism, would it?

This is true, except Batman doesn't have Lawbreaker to worry about.  There's no question that, outside a person saying "yes, please take a rummage around in my memories" accessing their mind is a violation of the Law.  If the GM doesn't want an NPCs mind read, just have that NPC decline.  If the PCs somehow convince him to do so through social conflict, well, they could have just stated the Taken Out result is "the NPC comes clean." 

[Farbot]

Ultimately it's your game and you and your players can do what you like. But I would offer this:

1) Define "mind reading" for your self and your PC's, then make it abundantly clear to your PC's the effects and consequences of the act of reading another characters mind.

2) Don't make reading the NPC's mind the only option open for the PC's to get the info that they need. Leave them the option of getting the information some other way, even if that other way is the extremely hard way (it would make a good test of character for the PC's)

And as for people finding out, I would think that a soul gaze or looking at some one with the sight would reveal damage done or traces left. Some may be more visible than others. I would make the "gazer" roll for it depending on how obvious or subtle the damage is.

[ARedthorn]

If I can draw a parallel... another law forbids diddling with someone else's body, but at least one member of the senior council is adept at healing through magic. Conceivably, his magic could operate by accelerating the natural healing processes of the body, but even that has consequences... and any more in depth healing would definitely be a violation of the second law, if it weren't mastered completely, carefully done, entirely beneficial, relatively safe, and consensual.

I imagine there are at least a handful of wizards who know their way around psychic healing/exploration, if only for the sake of being able to identify psychic damage or alterations and stabilize minds... in fact, I'm pretty sure the same senior council member says that he can do as much, but only very very carefully.

I'd say that makes it possible, but... very... very... unlikely. Like- the kind of unlikely where you'd need his specific oversight to confirm your methods and motives are completely safe, 100% of the time, to the degree that he would stake his life on it.

[Rubycon]

I like your comments, Redthorn and Farbot...

by the way: I didn't start this thread because I want my players to be able to mindread and by no means I wanted to discuss if it is dangerous - it is! But I think every rule has his exceptions, even for the White Council and volunteering along with a very good cause could be one in my opinion. That doesn't make it any easier or less dangerous. I do, however, think that such a good and plausible cause would result in getting the character no Lawbreaker power. At least, if the results are not too much devastating...

[Discipol]

AHA!
Healing magic is not transmutation. She didn't mend his flesh together, she just stimulated the body's natural healing. Just like removing the salt from a wound through washing.

And he was a volunteer lol, even if he didn't say it, she was a hot chick wanting to play magical touchy-touchy on him

[NicholasQuinn]

Whilst the White Council might, and even then I'm doubtful, over-look such an act, I believe personally that it would still warrant the Lawbreaker Stunt. Just because somebody has given permission, does not mean you aren't breaking down metaphorical doors/windows to get into their mind. Human minds are our inner sanctums, and are locked (biologically, and in a way mentally) from others. I just don't see how, even with consent, you could enter their mind and not leave damage; it isn't like they can open the door to let you in, at least, as far as I'm aware. If they were of the magic persausion, they could do something similar; broadcast their thoughts, such as Harry and Elaine do to eachother. But to actively read someones mind would count as an Invasion regardless of intent or consent, IMO.

[ARedthorn]

I actually wasn't referring to her- but to

(click to show/hide)

Injun Joe in Turn Coat

(not sure if that deserved spoiler text, but not taking a risk).

(click to show/hide)

He refers to doing more... erm, aggressive healing magic, but also talks about how he has to go back to med school every decade or so to keep his anatomy fresh enough to do it without endangering the person he's attempting it on. He also references some mind healing, but that may have been a fake-out to get harry to talk about something.

[Discipol]

I think in the end its the backend side. It is YOU who chooses to go into someone else's mind.

[Farbot]

I think everyone has valid points on the subject of consequences. Whether or not to hand out the lawbreaker stunt in this case is tricky in that both sides of the argument are correct. Those who say that if it's done with consent and good intentions believe that they would be acting within the spirit of the law and those who say that any fiddling with the mind whatsoever is an unequivocal NO, believe in the letter of the law. In light of this stalemate I would suggest that the result should be dependent upon the play group. A discussion of morals and consequences would point you to the climate of the groups feelings and then the game can proceed with whatever's agreed upon. Because after all it's about the story and everyone enjoying themselves, the rules are just there to facilitate.  

[zenten]

I actually wasn't referring to her- but to

(click to show/hide)

Injun Joe in Turn Coat

(not sure if that deserved spoiler text, but not taking a risk).

(click to show/hide)

He refers to doing more... erm, aggressive healing magic, but also talks about how he has to go back to med school every decade or so to keep his anatomy fresh enough to do it without endangering the person he's attempting it on. He also references some mind healing, but that may have been a fake-out to get harry to talk about something.

Mind you, who's to say that he doesn't have the Lawbreaker power?

[Rubycon]

Ive read in the rulebook that the 6 Laws of the White Council is about the spirit of these laws...

[SunlessNick]

Those who say that if it's done with consent and good intentions believe that they would be acting within the spirit of the law and those who say that any fiddling with the mind whatsoever is an unequivocal NO, believe in the letter of the law.  -  Farbot

But the letter of the law is still "invade" - a word that presupposes a lack of consent and ill-motive.  The first two laws say "never take a life" and "never transform another," neither of which account for motive - that the third law is phrased in a way that does imply manner and motive, as opposed to saying "never read the thoughts of another" or "never enter the thoughts of another," seems like it should matter, not least because we're talking about things that have magical consequence as well as legal.

[Radijs]

I actually wasn't referring to her- but to

(click to show/hide)

Injun Joe in Turn Coat

(not sure if that deserved spoiler text, but not taking a risk).

(click to show/hide)

He refers to doing more... erm, aggressive healing magic, but also talks about how he has to go back to med school every decade or so to keep his anatomy fresh enough to do it without endangering the person he's attempting it on. He also references some mind healing, but that may have been a fake-out to get harry to talk about something.

(click to show/hide)

Actually as its written he doesn't have to but he does to keep his knolwedge current. I don't think its because he'd risk harming his patients if he didn't but because he wants to keep up with the changing times and advances in the field.

[noclue]

But the letter of the law is still "invade" - a word that presupposes a lack of consent and ill-motive.  The first two laws say "never take a life" and "never transform another," neither of which account for motive - that the third law is phrased in a way that does imply manner and motive, as opposed to saying "never read the thoughts of another" or "never enter the thoughts of another," seems like it should matter, not least because we're talking about things that have magical consequence as well as legal.

Sounds like something your PC could argue during the trial. Good social conflict there.

[Michael Sandy]

I had been thinking of some background for a wizard who had been involved in shutting down the CIA's mindreading and other psychic phenomena program in the 1960s.  I am trying to come up with a good aspect relating to his training, that he basically trained against what he expected to face.  So he and a couple other apprentices were trained on how to resist mind probes and domination, and to do that, they also had to learn how to do mind probes and domination type mental attacks.

Basicly they had little mental duels, where they would write down a 'secret' on a scrap of paper, and their opponent had to somehow find out that secret within a short time period, then they would switch roles for a period, and so on.

Maybe the aspect would be "My training gaves me nightmares... here, let me share them with you"