The Dresden Files > DF Spoilers
Black Magic - Intent, Fact & Knowledge
Vivictus:
--- Quote from: wardenferry419 on October 30, 2017, 05:37:15 PM ---So, you think killing someone with magic kills the caster a little due to a magical link?
--- End quote ---
Just guessing really, but that would seem to work. It can't be based on the morality of the action or the caster because we've said a well intentioned spell that kills will taint the wizard and conversely using magic to unjustly kill an innocent non-human doesn't result in a taint.
The only other option I can think of would be that the system itself has some kind of built-in intelligence. That is, magic is aware or the results of its use and the taint is punishment for breaking it's somewhat arbitrary rules.
huangjimmy108:
--- Quote from: wardenferry419 on October 30, 2017, 09:17:17 AM ---A passionate misuse of magic is more tolerable than a deliberate misuse of magic?
--- End quote ---
Not exactly. If what Harry say and my understanding of it is correct. intent i.e: Passionate or deliberate, is only a part of the equation.
Magic, at least the kind Harry is using, works on the principal a kin to the 3 fold law we know in many witch novels.
Whatever you send out, eventually comes back to you. If you send out good things, you get good things back. If you send out vile things, you get vile things in return. However, it is a bit more complex. The intent of the wizard only play a part.
The final backlash a wizard receives depends on how much is reflected back to the wizard. In witchy novels, it is often said to be 3 times what you send out, but in the Dresdenverse, the backlash a wizard receives depends on the consequences of the magic not on the intent of the caster.
Example: a wizard is attempting to use magic to heal a person. The wizard has about 97% good intent and only 3% dark intent. If the result of the magic is good, and the person is healed right and proper, the wizard will receive the backlash from the 97% good karma. If the person is not healed properly and get crippled, the wizard will be penalize by the 3% negative karma. If the person is killed due to the wizard's magical healing attempt, the wizard won't just get the 3% negative karma, he'll get 3% negative karma multiplied by the black magic, let say 10 times, so the wizard will get 30% negative karma even though he has 97% good intent when he casted the magic originally. This is probably what happens to Molly, though in her case, I estimate the intent is about 80% good and 20% dark.
Now, let's say that the wizard is only pretending to heal the person. He actually trying to kill the person instead. In this case, the wizard has 3% good intent and 97% bad intent. Assuming the wizard did kill the target, he'll get 970% negative karma. He'll go insane fast this way, but even if the magic fail to kill, the wizard still get the 97% negative karma from the original intent.
In theory, if the wizard can have 100% good intent, even if the target get killed due to the magic, the wizard won't be tainted at all. But it is impossible. Not to mention that it is impossible for a mortal to have 100% pure intent, if the magic is truly casted using 100% pure benevelont intent, the magic won't be able to harm anyone in the firstplace.
huangjimmy108:
--- Quote from: Vivictus on October 30, 2017, 06:19:25 PM ---Just guessing really, but that would seem to work. It can't be based on the morality of the action or the caster because we've said a well intentioned spell that kills will taint the wizard and conversely using magic to unjustly kill an innocent non-human doesn't result in a taint.
The only other option I can think of would be that the system itself has some kind of built-in intelligence. That is, magic is aware or the results of its use and the taint is punishment for breaking it's somewhat arbitrary rules.
--- End quote ---
The council say that killing non humankind does not violate the 7 laws, whether or not it cause taint however is another matter entirely.
Harry use forzare to kill the fetch in book 8, and he get lost in battle lust. The fetch is non human, but it is shown to us in book 9 that Harry's control of his temper is growing steadily worse by the day.
It is entirely possible that unjustly killing a supernatural being, say killing a bigfoot like river shoulders, will cause some kind of taint even though the council won't acknowledge the act as a law violation. It seldom happens though. When it comes to supernaturals and wizards. The ones who has good intentions won't come, and those who come don't have good intentions. The way things are going, it is well nai impossible to unjustly kill a supernatural.
I don't think we can ignore the factor of morality / intent entirely when talking about black magic taint. It does not make sense otherwise. It will be all too easy to turn a good wizard into a warlock if consequences is all that matters. If harry cast fuego and burn something, all a vampire need to do is to make a torch with the resulting fire and use that fire to kill someone. Harry will be tainted and the council will be force to behead him or risk a new warlock. The vampire can do this everytime they fight a council warden and soon all wizards become warlocks and the council will be too busy handling them.
Rasins:
--- Quote from: Rasins on October 26, 2017, 06:37:14 PM ---Intent is not a factor in being tainted by black magic.
I seem to recall a WoJ where he said that if a wizard uses magic to light a candle and the candle gets knocked over, burning the house down and humans die, the wizard will be tainted.
--- End quote ---
Serack - Can you help find this one?
LordDresden2:
--- Quote from: Griffyn612 on October 20, 2017, 05:07:58 PM ---The WoJ on the subject is that intent has no bearing on dark magic corruption. If you do something bad for the right reasons, you're corrupted.
--- End quote ---
We already know intent makes a big difference. It's not the only factor, but it's relevant. A warlock who kills with magic by accident is far more likely to be able to avoid permanent damage than someone who acts with malice aforethought.
Molly was damaged by what she did to Nelson and Rosie...but if she'd done it purely out of bad intent, she'd be far more damaged (and dead, because the Council wouldn't have spared her in that case anyway).
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version