1st Law Breaker Stunt

[bitterpill]

I was wondering if a character has the 1st lawbreaker stunt and wants to use it to help him blanketly kill would you let him, tecnically killing a red would not be breaking the law but I still think after spending 2 refresh on a power he should be able to gain some advantage from it in the campaign. I suppose the same goes for mind-hacking fae etc and other law violations.

[Moriden]

Yes. i also permit sociopathic characters to get the stunts if they'd like regardless of weather or not they have yet broken said law.

[sjksprocket]

If it fits. And what I mean by fits is, Fits the character, fits the campaign, fits everything. If someone is just trying to be destructive for the point of being destructive then we might have to have a talk. But I would say that IMO that sure.

[Tallyrand]

Personally I would, if nothing else than to prevent the power for encouraging the player to kill more people.

[Van_DeMark]

agreed, in a game I personally had to take the stunt because my Trouble aspect would have earned me it anyway. It keeps the players from going overboard too fast.

[Wolfwood2]

Does that mean you could use the Lawbreaker Stunt when killing Red Court vampires, even if killing vampires isn't an attempt to break the Law again (because they don't count)?

Lawbreaker (First Law) would be a lot more useful if it applied whenever you tried to use magic to kill anything, human or not.

[bitterpill]

I was asking would people let 1st lawbreaker help kill non-humans (not lawbreaker), in the end I think it would because lawbreaker represents a warping of someone into a better killer (a warping of thier mind and soul), mechanically killing a red court vampire is no different to killing a normal person and being good at one should equate to being good at the other.  

[DFJunkie]

Personally yes, I allow Lawbreakers to get the benefit of the "Humans Only" laws even when using them against non-humans.  Not only do I feel like they should get a non-trivial benefit for that point of refresh, but it fits with the way the laws are described.  Also, imagine your Lawbreaker sends a jet of flame at what he thinks is a vanilla mortal but is in fact a RCV in its flesh mask.  How silly would it be if the character didn't get the bonus?

[devonapple]

I agree: it takes killing a mortal to earn Lawbreaker, but once earned, it should be good for killing anything.

[Becq]

Gain a +1 bonus to any spellcasting
roll whenever using magic in a way
which would break the specified Law of
Magic.

It seems to me to be fairly clearly written.  Killing a vampire with magic is not "using magic in a way which would break the [First] Law of Magic".  Therefore no (First) Lawbreaker would be gained, and no existing (First) Lawbreaker would apply.

Obviously, groups can choose to houserule as desired.

[mostlyawake]

Our group discussed this and decided that it should apply to anything.  While the stunt is about humans, the mentality of someone focused on using magic for death is to kill anything with magic, and to solve any problem by killing with magic.  So, not only do let them use the bonus on vampires, but I compel them to do so. And, once, on a puppy.

[Sanctaphrax]

A puppy? That sounds like a story that the boards need to hear.

Becq is right, but I view Lawbreaker as underpowered and therefore have no problem with people using it to kill vampires. But once you start stacking fixes (it adds to power and control and it works against vampires) things get dicey.

[Becq]

I guess I view Lawbreaker as a penalty that happens to carry a benefit than as a true 'power' that ought to be balanced.

That said, Refinement grants two +1's that are restricted by fairly limiting stacking rules and that only apply to one specialization of either Evocation or Thaumaturgy.  Lawbreaker exchanges all of those limitations for a 'purpose'-based limitation -- but it applies to all specializations of both Evocation and Thaumaturgy, and combines with existing Refinement in ways that can break the stacking rules.  That seems plenty potent to me ... especially for a 'power' that is intended as a penalty.

It kind of reminds me of the movie The Mummy (the Branden Frasier one) in which the high priest was 'punished' by a 'curse' that gave him practically unlimited power ... thus forcing the creation of an entire secret society dedicated to making sure he never had the opportunity to use it.

[Sanctaphrax]

Eh. Lawbreaker is frequently inapplicable. You can count on your Refinements.

I have little respect for the value of multiple evocation elements, and the thaumaturgical broadness of Lawbreaker is about equal to that of a specialization.

The stacking point is valid, but when you get right down to it the bonus is half as large. Stacking issues aren't that much of a problem at ordinary power levels.

[mostlyawake]

Honestly, our consideration had very little to do with mechanics, balance, what the person gained or lost by taking the stunt, ect.  It was based entirely on the concept that your soul is tainted and drawn towards further use of magic for killing.  It becomes the proverbial hammer.