The Dresden Files > DFRPG
Law Talk
killking72:
--- Quote from: solbergb on August 03, 2014, 03:27:23 AM ---I lean toward the idea that the First, Second and Fourth are about free will, and probably necromancy too...it's the part that enslaves souls that seems problematic.
--- End quote ---
I think this is the most correct way to look at it. The general idea of the laws is that you're using your magic to destroy the free will of another human, and that's why killing vampires, humans enthralled by people, fairies, etc, isn't really that bad because they don't have free will anymore. Traveling against the currents of time essentially destroys the decisions made by people with free will in the whole timeline you just made split off. Enthralling(4), killing(1), and destroying someones mind(3) all make it now unable for a person to make decisions.
blackstaff67:
Will I be spoiling much by discussing Lawbreaking in the Paranet Papers? Looking at Moira in the Las Vegas chapter, a few issues spring to mind...
Sanctaphrax:
You should be fine. The spoiler policy applies to the events of the novels, not the RPG.
And actually, I'm not sure there's such a thing as a spoiler right now. Fred Hicks said
--- Quote from: iago ---The general rule when determining whether or not something is a spoiler is this:
Did it come out this year?
Is it from a book that is currently only available in hardcover form?
Do I have any doubts about whether or not it's a spoiler?
--- End quote ---
and Skin Game came out in May 2014. It's available in paperback now.
Hogeyhead:
Okay I haven't used these forums a lot and I know the first law is discussed a lot, and I know that my query has probably been dealt with in the past, but, and I haven't read the whole thread to look to see if it's in there, but it's hundreds of posts long or something, so excuse me.
So in my game I am the only one flinging around evocation at all, (well someone just took runic magic, but he won't be attacking with it, and it's not mortal magic anywho) and the ruling on how the first law is broken is pretty harsh.
How it is ruled is that if I damage any mortal with evocation (even by accident or fallout or anything equivalent) whether or not they die I gain the lawbreaker stunt. Because I intended or caused harm it is enough to count as black magic.
From what I understand on the forums from what little I've read you really need to actually kill someone to break the law, like bare minimum, but well I'm not the story teller. The books actually show wizards attacking mortals with magic very rarely, but every once in a while it happens. With harry the story teller's argument is that yes he's breaking the law, he already has the stunt after all. But Morgan attacks Harry with magic in Dead beat, and his argument is yes, Morgan just broke the first law. Personally I don't feel that's the case, I mean Morgan's character is such that he wouldn't break the law even in a rage.
I don't think anything will change this ruling, and I've sort of come to terms with it, and he allows magic weapons to not count depending on what exactly they do, so my +3 weaponry +3 damage value sword if fine, so it's not really a problem per say... It can just become a problem very fast accidentally.
Am I wrong in thinking that you need to actually kill to break the law?
Mr. Death:
You absolutely have to kill to break the law. That's the whole point of the law. If your GM is ruling that any harm to a mortal via magic is breaking the law, he's flat out wrong about how the game world works.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version