Author Topic: Question about the first law  (Read 10559 times)

Offline Shift8

  • Conversationalist
  • **
  • Posts: 190
    • View Profile
Re: Question about the first law
« Reply #30 on: July 13, 2017, 12:57:46 AM »
If it we were just talking about Evocation Id agree with you, killing with a grenade or a fireball doesnt seem any different.  But Thaumaturgy is a hole other story. You can kill anyone in the world from anywhere in the world with nothing more than a Name or even a good picture (I swear I recall this mentioned in an early book but Im still looking for the exact quote) though actual hair or blood obviously work better.  Thaumaturgic assassination unchecked is basically Death Note.

Surely there is some kind of relatively easy defense against this? As you say, this would be OP as hell. But it would in fact be so OP that I think the laws would almost be irrelevant. I mean, good luck enforcing that. How would you even know who the culprit was? And if the Wardens ever made a thing of this, I imagine the culprit could just off the entire WC easy as pie.

There must be some kind of counter to this that makes it less death note like. The alternative is a world of death note holders. Which it would be pretty pointless to make illegal since it would be so easy to do. 

Edit: Plus if this were that easy then the Black Staff would just death note all the WC's enemies. No need for wardens etc. Just death note Nicodemus, Ortega, etc etc. Clearly there hard limits to said magic that make it so difficult its not practical. Otherwise we would not have any of the fighting we have in the books. It would just people people racing to theumaturgy each other out of existence. 

« Last Edit: July 13, 2017, 01:01:14 AM by Shift8 »

Offline jonas

  • Posty McPostington
  • ***
  • Posts: 1258
  • Surpassed Ms. Duck
    • View Profile
Re: Question about the first law
« Reply #31 on: July 13, 2017, 02:05:15 AM »
As Harry explains it you must have a strong enough connection or constructed spellwork to allow an enormous amount of energy to be transferred through it without burning it up first. So just having the object in question might not be enough. Then he goes of on a short tangent about how which phase of the moon it's in could effect it but he wouldn't know, he hasn't researched such magics.
But, as we know constructed spellworks are mostly just placeholders to focus ones mind on absolutes without waivering in focus. Soooo, You can Nerf the WC if you can Nerf the WC, ya know? Add in the fact they are often behind thresholds and Wards of unknown capabilities in repelling such things and you'd have to set it up pretty sly to get'er done as it were.
Quote from: A. Lanning
I'm sorry, My responses are limited. You must ask the right questions.
Quote from: C Chaplin
...And so as long as men die, Liberty will never perish.

Offline Shift8

  • Conversationalist
  • **
  • Posts: 190
    • View Profile
Re: Question about the first law
« Reply #32 on: July 13, 2017, 02:15:36 AM »
As Harry explains it you must have a strong enough connection or constructed spellwork to allow an enormous amount of energy to be transferred through it without burning it up first. So just having the object in question might not be enough. Then he goes of on a short tangent about how which phase of the moon it's in could effect it but he wouldn't know, he hasn't researched such magics.
But, as we know constructed spellworks are mostly just placeholders to focus ones mind on absolutes without waivering in focus. Soooo, You can Nerf the WC if you can Nerf the WC, ya know? Add in the fact they are often behind thresholds and Wards of unknown capabilities in repelling such things and you'd have to set it up pretty sly to get'er done as it were.

That somewhat helps with regard to single individuals doing that kind of stuff. Although I would still be a little stumped we dont see it more often.

What it doesn't satisfactorily explain for me is how it prevents something like the WC, or any large group of wizards for that matter, from using it all the time. You would think that a organization as powerful and resource laden as the WC could sniff from existence anyone they wanted. The senior council alone would seem sufficient to the task.

(click to show/hide)

Offline jonas

  • Posty McPostington
  • ***
  • Posts: 1258
  • Surpassed Ms. Duck
    • View Profile
Re: Question about the first law
« Reply #33 on: July 13, 2017, 02:19:08 AM »
There is a Woj about every few centuries the WC takes the kids gloves off? We've not seen that happen as far as the WC itself is concerned, but from the outside looking in the RC just got the smack down of the century from the most Badass Warden alive.
Quote from: A. Lanning
I'm sorry, My responses are limited. You must ask the right questions.
Quote from: C Chaplin
...And so as long as men die, Liberty will never perish.

Offline Shift8

  • Conversationalist
  • **
  • Posts: 190
    • View Profile
Re: Question about the first law
« Reply #34 on: July 13, 2017, 02:29:17 AM »
There is a Woj about every few centuries the WC takes the kids gloves off? We've not seen that happen as far as the WC itself is concerned, but from the outside looking in the RC just got the smack down of the century from the most Badass Warden alive.

(click to show/hide)

Offline Quantus

  • Special Collections Division
  • Needs A Life
  • ****
  • Posts: 25216
  • He Who Lurks Around
    • View Profile
Re: Question about the first law
« Reply #35 on: July 13, 2017, 01:09:36 PM »
Surely there is some kind of relatively easy defense against this? As you say, this would be OP as hell. But it would in fact be so OP that I think the laws would almost be irrelevant. I mean, good luck enforcing that. How would you even know who the culprit was? And if the Wardens ever made a thing of this, I imagine the culprit could just off the entire WC easy as pie.

There must be some kind of counter to this that makes it less death note like. The alternative is a world of death note holders. Which it would be pretty pointless to make illegal since it would be so easy to do. 

Edit: Plus if this were that easy then the Black Staff would just death note all the WC's enemies. No need for wardens etc. Just death note Nicodemus, Ortega, etc etc. Clearly there hard limits to said magic that make it so difficult its not practical. Otherwise we would not have any of the fighting we have in the books. It would just people people racing to theumaturgy each other out of existence.
There's still the requirement of a Link, which keep you from just Offing random political figures, but beyond that Nope, you're basically just screwed.  Harry says as much in CD, to the shock of his comrades:


(click to show/hide)


Now dont get me wrong, Wards are still a Thing, and Defenses Do exist especially in the Oldest strongholds like Edinburgh (which is what the CI curse was sized to take on). Harry probably could have sat in a Circle in the Svart's compound and actually been entirely Fine; but that would have immobilized him and taken him entirely Out of Play. 

And besides, that is when you're talking about two sides who both Know what's actually going on, and they have the time and resources (generations) to build such a Bunker.  This tangent was based on the statement that the First Law is entirely arbitrary because Mundane weapons are equally effective and so it makes no sense to regulate just one.  A Black Hat Thaumaturgist could wreck absolute nightmarish havoc on the general population.
<(o)> <(o)>
        / \
      (o o)
   \==-==/


“We’re all imaginary friends to one another."

"An entire life, an entire personality, can be permanently altered by just one sentence." -An Accidental Villain

Offline Shift8

  • Conversationalist
  • **
  • Posts: 190
    • View Profile
Re: Question about the first law
« Reply #36 on: July 13, 2017, 02:45:33 PM »
There's still the requirement of a Link, which keep you from just Offing random political figures, but beyond that Nope, you're basically just screwed.  Harry says as much in CD, to the shock of his comrades:


(click to show/hide)


Now dont get me wrong, Wards are still a Thing, and Defenses Do exist especially in the Oldest strongholds like Edinburgh (which is what the CI curse was sized to take on). Harry probably could have sat in a Circle in the Svart's compound and actually been entirely Fine; but that would have immobilized him and taken him entirely Out of Play. 

And besides, that is when you're talking about two sides who both Know what's actually going on, and they have the time and resources (generations) to build such a Bunker.  This tangent was based on the statement that the First Law is entirely arbitrary because Mundane weapons are equally effective and so it makes no sense to regulate just one.  A Black Hat Thaumaturgist could wreck absolute nightmarish havoc on the general population.

I still think that makes the law pointless. The aforementioned power is so OP that making illegal is essentially moot. Not to mention that the ethical stand point is still based on who and why its used. No should care if you kill off Nicodemus with it. And you cant stop people from using it for wrong purposes.

That being said that is a totally broken bit of magic that needs to be nerfed in some manner officially. Its so powerful that it literally makes no sense whatsoever why the entire book series has taken place as it has. If all you need is someones blood or hair etc, then its worth whatever effort and patience are required considering the massive payoff. There is basically almost no motive to do anything otherwise. Especially since were talking about people with huge resources and power, if you really wanted to get someones DNA, it wouldnt be that hard.

Getting any persons hair or blood would be child's play. It sounds hard but it really wouldnt be, especially considering the payoff. It would be as simple as breaking into Dresden's car and looking for a loose hair. Etc. And thats just conventional means. Adding other magic to the mix makes it even easier.

-Follow dresden to where he gets his hair cut....
-Some tiny magical creature or magically possessed animal (like a mosquito....) takes it.
-Rummage his trash for things...like a straw or cup that has been used.
-Steal his blood from a hospital.
-Any person who ever wounded Dresden or another other person ever in combat with a blade....

I mean good greif this doesnt take a whole lot of imagination. If you wanted to do this, you could.

Offline Quantus

  • Special Collections Division
  • Needs A Life
  • ****
  • Posts: 25216
  • He Who Lurks Around
    • View Profile
Re: Question about the first law
« Reply #37 on: July 13, 2017, 07:08:57 PM »
I still think that makes the law pointless. The aforementioned power is so OP that making illegal is essentially moot. Not to mention that the ethical stand point is still based on who and why its used. No should care if you kill off Nicodemus with it. And you cant stop people from using it for wrong purposes.
Sure you can.  With Wardens and Sharp swords.  Thats rather the whole Point of the Laws in the first place, or the concept of Enforcement.

<(o)> <(o)>
        / \
      (o o)
   \==-==/


“We’re all imaginary friends to one another."

"An entire life, an entire personality, can be permanently altered by just one sentence." -An Accidental Villain

Offline Shift8

  • Conversationalist
  • **
  • Posts: 190
    • View Profile
Re: Question about the first law
« Reply #38 on: July 13, 2017, 09:26:15 PM »
Sure you can.  With Wardens and Sharp swords.  Thats rather the whole Point of the Laws in the first place, or the concept of Enforcement.

The problem would be the same issue you would have with something like a death note: you'd have almost no way of finding out who dun it. Plus a truly industrious practitioner would just get a large number of the WC's DNA before attacking their real target and off the WC all at once. Surprising this hasn't happened already tbh. Youd think that a bunch of dudes centuries old would have made an enemy by now who would do this. Hell, imagine what would happen if you simply told the WC you had all their blood or something? Just my humble opinion but I really think Jim needs to add something to the story that explains why this hasn't happened already. Some kind of hard counter that is easy to implement or exists all the time. But that is just my two cents.
« Last Edit: July 13, 2017, 09:28:24 PM by Shift8 »

Offline Anubissama

  • Conversationalist
  • **
  • Posts: 295
    • View Profile
Re: Question about the first law
« Reply #39 on: July 14, 2017, 07:04:18 AM »
I think it is also worth mentioning that the rituals we are talking about are rather complicated high-level magic, you don't just take a photo of somebody sit in a circle and stare daggers at the picture. It's not like any Tom, Dick, and Harry turned Warlock can just go and whip them out.

They usually require White Council level of skill, power, and training. Which in itself would minimise the pool of suspect would you investigate a thaumaturgy related murder. Not to mention that there are always ways to reduce the suspect pool further. Black Magic leaves traces you can find, physical distance is also a factor in this spells, so it's not like you could literally kill someone who is Hawai from Moscow, the energy expenditure would be too great. You have to believe you have a right to kill that person so you most likely know them and hold a personal grudge against them that even a vanilla investigation might find out.

The only person we have seen use that kind of thaumaturgy outside the WC was Victor Sells, and he was as it later turned out sponsored and coached by the Red Court or someone from the Circle. It's not something the average warlock will get his hands on, and even if, it is even lees likely they will have the juice to pull it off. Sells had to wait for thunderstorms to roll in, while having fresh blood, skin, and hair of his victims, the perfect thaumaturgical channel, despite having the closest a Warlock can hope for in actual magical training.
DV Anubissama V1.2 YR5 FR(M) 3 BK++++: RP++++: JB+: TH+++: WG: CL++: SW +(-): BC+: MC+++: SH(Molly)+++++:

Offline Quantus

  • Special Collections Division
  • Needs A Life
  • ****
  • Posts: 25216
  • He Who Lurks Around
    • View Profile
Re: Question about the first law
« Reply #40 on: July 14, 2017, 12:51:33 PM »
The problem would be the same issue you would have with something like a death note: you'd have almost no way of finding out who dun it. Plus a truly industrious practitioner would just get a large number of the WC's DNA before attacking their real target and off the WC all at once. Surprising this hasn't happened already tbh. Youd think that a bunch of dudes centuries old would have made an enemy by now who would do this. Hell, imagine what would happen if you simply told the WC you had all their blood or something? Just my humble opinion but I really think Jim needs to add something to the story that explains why this hasn't happened already. Some kind of hard counter that is easy to implement or exists all the time. But that is just my two cents.

It's not a bBlack or White, all or nothing thing like that, not at all.  You say it's impossible to figure out who dunnit, but that was the exact plot of the very first book.  You say anyone could just round up DNA samples of the whole council and kill them en-masse like it's as easy as flipping a lightswitch, but there ARE quantifiable power requirements and there ARE defenses that increase them dramatically.  You say it's surprising it hasnt happened yet, but Changes showed us the sort of scope of spell it would take, and it wasnt small, or cheap.  You say that because it seems strong to you Jim needs to alter his setting to nerf it to uselessness, but...huh?
<(o)> <(o)>
        / \
      (o o)
   \==-==/


“We’re all imaginary friends to one another."

"An entire life, an entire personality, can be permanently altered by just one sentence." -An Accidental Villain

Offline Shift8

  • Conversationalist
  • **
  • Posts: 190
    • View Profile
Re: Question about the first law
« Reply #41 on: July 14, 2017, 02:14:53 PM »
It's not a bBlack or White, all or nothing thing like that, not at all.  You say it's impossible to figure out who dunnit, but that was the exact plot of the very first book.  You say anyone could just round up DNA samples of the whole council and kill them en-masse like it's as easy as flipping a lightswitch, but there ARE quantifiable power requirements and there ARE defenses that increase them dramatically.  You say it's surprising it hasnt happened yet, but Changes showed us the sort of scope of spell it would take, and it wasnt small, or cheap.  You say that because it seems strong to you Jim needs to alter his setting to nerf it to uselessness, but...huh?

It's not a bBlack or White, all or nothing thing like that, not at all.  You say it's impossible to figure out who dunnit, but that was the exact plot of the very first book.  You say anyone could just round up DNA samples of the whole council and kill them en-masse like it's as easy as flipping a lightswitch, but there ARE quantifiable power requirements and there ARE defenses that increase them dramatically.  You say it's surprising it hasnt happened yet, but Changes showed us the sort of scope of spell it would take, and it wasnt small, or cheap.  You say that because it seems strong to you Jim needs to alter his setting to nerf it to uselessness, but...huh?

Sells was a once off. It would be very hard is most cases.

Power limits would really depend on how many you wanted to kill at once I would imagine, and what kind of spell. Killing off single individuals shouldnt be too much of a problem. Especially over centuries....

The changes spell was a highly specifc form of this. I dont think it makes sense to assume every one of those spells would be like that.

And there is still the bottom line that making it illegal is silly because the only thing that matters is the purpose of the killing. People who have ill intent to break the first law in general are not going to have pause just for theumaturgy, in fact there would be more incentive to use it since its easier to get away with. The penalty for getting caught is the same no matter how they break it.

Additionally the power logic doesnt work because EITHER the spells are so easy to do that its pointless, OR they are so hard to do that they are already sufficiently limited by reality so as to not require additional concern relative to any other form of 1st law breaking.
     If it is as Luccio says, and the laws (in particular the 1st) are really just in place to prevent OP wizard meddling, then they are about the stupidest thing in the entire DV from a moral and logical standpoint. And that is not an attack on Jim, but on the WC's logic. Many of the laws for that matter have uses that would probably not be evil. If the WC is running around offing heads just because they want to limit "power" then the WC needs to be annihilated as an organization for the very same purpose they think they are serving. Even without breaking the ANY of the laws, the amount that Wizards could meddle would be astronomical. Its like telling a man with a knife he is free to use the blade, just dont dare ever smack someone with the hilt. Keep the iceburg, just not the tip!
        The other problem with this of course is the idea that wizards should not meddle the the first place. There is nothing immoral about using your own power to advance your own interests. Every human being does this. People do it every single day without violating some moral principle. Just because some people would have a bigger advantage than others is entirely immaterial.