The Dresden Files > DFRPG
Law Talk
Serack:
Sanctaphrax, as a "curator" I love the work you did here.
I'll probably be going through some of these links later to see what kinds of insights they have that pertain to the canon proper.
Sanctaphrax:
Thanks, Serack. Very kind of you to say so.
Hope the links are useful in a non-gaming context.
Serack:
--- Quote from: Sanctaphrax on November 19, 2013, 10:18:37 PM ---Thanks, Serack. Very kind of you to say so.
Hope the links are useful in a non-gaming context.
--- End quote ---
Ok, I finally published a topic I've been building that does some heavy thinking about "Law Breaking" and black magic. It's not gaming centric, but those that are wrestling with this topic might find it insightful.
Law Breaking Vs Black Magic [Spoilers for everything]
blackstaff67:
An incident came up in-game recently:
Party captures a ghoul that did a car-bomb on the local Club Zero that also caught the local watering hole of the region's paranormal community (yes, the local Neutral Grounds was across from Club Zero. Somebody thought they'd get a two-for-one deal). In any event, the party had a sorcerer in the group. Upon being asked why he didn't just invade teh ghoul's mind, he replied: "Third AND Fourth Law violations there." Party's reply: "That exists to protect mortals." "Doesn't matter--not gonna do it, 'specially with a WC Wizard a few blocks away." He also claimed that in Storm Front, holding a demon by its name was a 4th law violation. I have the guy a Fate Point for his self-Compel.
I had to give it to him, he erred on the side of caution. Was he being too conservative, given that a ghoul is as far from human as a critter gets without being an Outsider?
Sanctaphrax:
From a pure rules stand-point he was being too conservative. But his attitude sounds like a sensible one for a sorcerer to have. His character hasn't read the rule-books and doesn't know what his Refresh total is, after all.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version