The Dresden Files > DFRPG
Rewriting Lawbreaker Powers
Sanctaphrax:
I think both the extreme consequence approach and the broadened power approach can work well. Really, Aspects do all the heavy lifting when it comes to representing corruption.
Exactly how powerful a broader interpretation of Lawbreaker is depends on the Law. Since Lawbreaker only gives +1 for 1 Refresh and Refinement gives +2, it's probably appropriate for Lawbreaker to be a bit broader. But someone with Sponsored Magic (Outside) boosting every single spellcasting roll with Seventh Lawbreaker is probably still getting too good a deal, especially when you consider that they're getting to ignore the pyramid system. On the other end of the spectrum, the guy who broke the Sixth Law probably isn't getting much bang for his buck.
With all that in mind, I think it's best to write out the details of each proposed broadened Lawbreaker before passing any judgements.
Deadmanwalking:
--- Quote from: backseat_adventurer on March 13, 2019, 07:45:00 AM ---Really, the 'human only' catch and linking it to the act that breaks the law, are the prime ways Lawbreaker is limited. Removing those limitations in a game that has combat with non-humans as a core part of play is problematic. I do still feel that the Lawbreaker powers give a nice, situational bonus, representing the temptation of power, with an RP penalty which can be handled by negotiation with your GM. Tacking on too much more makes it far too overpowered for a one refresh power. It's almost the power equivalent of a stunt.
--- End quote ---
Uh...Lawbreaker is pretty weak without broadening. Like, probably the single weakest power in the game. +1 or +2 Control when breaking the Law is a nice bonus when it applies, but even with the way I widen it it's not nearly as wide as you're implying.
I mean, let's take the First Law, since that's probably the most generally applicable. Sure, my version is +1 Control on all Elements...but it's also only on attacks, not maneuvers or blocks of any sort, and only when you're trying to kill. That's not broader than +1 Control to one element. It's not even broader, in practice, than +1 Offensive Control with one element. Both of which are only 1/2 a Refresh rather than the full -1 Refresh Lawbreaker grants. It does stack, of course, but still, there's a reason I threw in the predictive bonus.
And that's my broadened version. The version that gives +1 control only to kill humans specifically? Absurdly and unconscionably weak for a full Refresh. Heck, that's weak for a Stunt, never mind a Power. A Stunt to give +1 to hit humans with an attack skill is plausible...but add the killing restriction and that's weaker even than most other Stunts. And Powers are rather intentionally more impressive than Stunts.
nadia.skylark:
--- Quote ---I think it makes sense there is a mechanical refresh penalty. Besides, there are benefits to the power, so it's not really a big loss. Power at a price, right?
--- End quote ---
Well, that's the problem. If I'm roleplaying a character like Harry, I'm not breaking the Laws, so I get no bonus. Therefore, there are no mechanical benefits to spending the refresh.
--- Quote ---I think it's still too broad. All attack spells, on all possible targets is huge. Evocation grants 3 elements. Break a single law and that's essentially a +3 power for only one refresh and a few RP consequences.
--- End quote ---
Well, refinement is +2 to anything to do with the elements it's boosting. This would be +1, and even though it applies to all the elements, it only boosts attack spells, not shields or maneuvers. Also, it's explicitly +1 power, so you still need to roll to control it.
--- Quote ---For things like necromancy or biomancy... it gets a little harder, too. Raising a zombie via thaumaturgy technically isn't an attack spell, so what is the equivalent?
--- End quote ---
The equivalent is, it doesn't have one. If it's not an attack, it doesn't get the Lawbreaker (1st) bonus.
--- Quote ---Also, as I was saying before, the power reads "Gain a +1 bonus to any spellcasting roll whenever using magic in a way which would break the specified Law of Magic". This suggests it's the breaking of the Law itself that grants the bonus. If the Law isn't broken, you don't get the power, therefore, you shouldn't get the bonus for targeting non-humans. Unless somehow the scope of the Law itself widens if you break a law, which we now it doesn't.
--- End quote ---
I think that what should give you the bonus is doing things that put you in the same mindset as breaking the Laws. Breaking the Laws is supposed to change the way you think, so I figure it makes sense.
--- Quote ---But someone with Sponsored Magic (Outside) boosting every single spellcasting roll with Seventh Lawbreaker is probably still getting too good a deal, especially when you consider that they're getting to ignore the pyramid system.
--- End quote ---
True, but I'm pretty sure that if you use the RAW version of Lawbreaker (7th), you're still getting the bonus every time you use your sponsored magic, since using it is reaching beyond the Outer Gates.
--- Quote ---With all that in mind, I think it's best to write out the details of each proposed broadened Lawbreaker before passing any judgements.
--- End quote ---
Do you have any suggestions for Lawbreaker (2nd-4th, & 6th)? I've already written up my idea for Lawbreaker (1st), and I figure Lawbreaker (5th) should just be +1 to necromancy since necromancers are supposed to be scary powerful and you'll get a lot more consequences from the White Council even if you avoid technically breaking the Laws.
g33k:
Rather than fiddle with "Lawbreaker" maybe just take an Aspect? Something that represents being on-the-edge, but not calling upon the specific Lawbreaker rules, and thus not engaging the play-balance issue.
Remember, the "Laws of Magic" label covers two things:
* Did you violate the metaphysics/psychology of the Dresdenverse? Have you ACTUALLY taken that first step down the slippery slope?
* Do the Wardens think you did? Are they watching you like a hawk, and you may get WardenSword'ed at any moment?Just because the Wardens are riding you like you're the only horse in town, doesn't mean you actually DID anything wrong; and just because you did, doesn't mean they know about it!
Take an Aspect like:
"I walk the Line"
Invoke it for benefit when you deploy possibly-excessive violence, or grey-area mind-magic, etc etc etc.
GM can invoke it to bring in a Warden out of the blue, to compel you toward that grey-area magic, etc.
backseat_adventurer:
--- Quote from: Deadmanwalking on March 13, 2019, 11:36:43 AM ---Uh...Lawbreaker is pretty weak without broadening. Like, probably the single weakest power in the game. +1 or +2 Control when breaking the Law is a nice bonus when it applies, but even with the way I widen it it's not nearly as wide as you're implying.
I mean, let's take the First Law, since that's probably the most generally applicable. Sure, my version is +1 Control on all Elements...but it's also only on attacks, not maneuvers or blocks of any sort, and only when you're trying to kill. That's not broader than +1 Control to one element. It's not even broader, in practice, than +1 Offensive Control with one element. Both of which are only 1/2 a Refresh rather than the full -1 Refresh Lawbreaker grants. It does stack, of course, but still, there's a reason I threw in the predictive bonus.
And that's my broadened version. The version that gives +1 control only to kill humans specifically? Absurdly and unconscionably weak for a full Refresh. Heck, that's weak for a Stunt, never mind a Power. A Stunt to give +1 to hit humans with an attack skill is plausible...but add the killing restriction and that's weaker even than most other Stunts. And Powers are rather intentionally more impressive than Stunts.
--- End quote ---
I suppose I've been playing with far too many players who would completely take advantage of that. Since most opponents in combat are non-human they can intend to kill, take advantage of the bonus, but not 'really' break the Law another time. Then it's a mad scramble to engineer situations to prevent that. Our table is currently pretty reasonable but I suppose I've learned a few knee-jerk habits.
If it works out in play, I will take it on. I just don't want to reward bad behavior ;)
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version