Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - ReaderAt2046

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5]
61
DFRPG / Re: Game-Breaking Powers To Worry About?
« on: May 14, 2013, 01:30:01 AM »

Two thoughts:

1: I thought there was a rule that the bonus from a Rebate power can't be more than one less than the cost of what it's tied to. So a Cold-iron catch could be worth up to +4 by the rules (very widely known and easily accessed), but if you've only got Inhuman toughness (-2), you only get +1 for the Catch.

2: Orbius looks much less OP when you note that it's an 8-shift spell, so your average player will have to eat at least 4 mental stress just to call that much power, and probably a few more shifts of backlash to make it go off straight. Also, for comparison an 8-shift straight attack will completely bypass the entire stress track of anything without at least Supernatural Toughness (or Inhuman Toughness and Hulking Form).

62
DFRPG / Re: WCV Powers
« on: May 14, 2013, 01:16:35 AM »

On a related note, I know you regain all Hunger-dependent powers and clear all your Hunger stress if you feed deeply enough to kill, but the books don't seem to say how much stress/powers you get back by just feeding without killing (on-screen, I know there's a one-dot regen for feeding off-screen).

63
DFRPG / Re: "Official" Perspective on Lawbreaking
« on: May 14, 2013, 01:08:24 AM »

Something that is driving me insane, because it's about the only part of this system that doesn't seem to make sense: Why is it considered wrong to kill with magic even when it would be not only acceptable but mandatory to kill any other way? To give a specific example, suppose we have Warden Jason Knight fighting some sort of warlock and in the course of the battle Jason blows the warlock's head off his shoulders with a fireball spell. As the system stands now, that would earn him a Lawbreaker stunt, but doing the exact same thing for the exact same reason, except with his sword instead of magic, has no effect on him.

At its core, my problem stems from how Lawbreaking corrupts. Everything I've read indicates that Lawbreaking corrupts because of how magic comes from belief, so breaking the First Law means that you believe killing is right. My question, though, is what if you kill for a good reason, like to protect others or to enforce Justice? Wouldn't that only reinforce your belief that you should kill for, and only for, the right reasons?

The fact that the White Council has a self-defense exemption seems to support this position, and yet more importantly, we see Harry kill dozens of humans with magic in Grave Peril without meaning to, but there doesn't seem to be any negative effects on his soul, which would imply that it's the intent to kill that corrupts. But clearly not all killing is wrong, ergo, intent to kill is not always wrong.

In short, it seems that doing something good for good reasons can still make you evil. Please explain?

64
DFRPG / Re: The First Law of Magic In-Play: Semi-Official Advice
« on: May 14, 2013, 12:50:07 AM »
To be honest, the way the First Law is presented in the books doesn't seem to make any kind of sense. Let me run through the situation as I understand it.

1. Magic is the expression of belief. Therefore, you can only do something with magic if you believe it's the right thing to do, and when you use magic to do something, you will believe in the future that the magic was the correct thing to do.

2. Now, the reason we have the First Law is specifically because of the application of Point 1 to murder. In other words, if you commit murder with magic, you are the sort of person who believes murder is justified and will continue to believe so.

So far this makes sense, but then it seems to go too far.

3. It is fairly indisputable that the Council believes there are several circumstances where killing someone, specifically someone human, is not only acceptable but morally required. Why, then, is killing with magic under these circumstances still out. Or to put it another way, if you may chop someone's head off with a sword because he is a warlock, why is blowing his head off with a fireball for exactly the same reason banned? The belief that will be reinforced (that killing is acceptable under certain specific circumstances) is one the Council agrees with, so where is the problem here? As the rules now stand, a player can be punished for doing something that is arguably morally required.

3.5 To be fair, there does seem to be a proviso for using lethal force in self-defense if necessary, but that hardly seems to cover what I'm trying to get at here.

Tl;dr. Why is it wrong to kill with magic when it would be right to kill any other way?

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5]