Comments thread for "The Laws of Magic: Part 5 of 8"

[iago]

The Fourth Law of Magic is: Never enthrall another.

http://www.dresdenfilesrpg.com/news/archives/2007/07/post_1.php

[hollow49]

Of all the Laws, this is the one we've seen in the most detail in the books, thanks to PG. (While First Law infractions are more common, they are also more clear-cut and unambiguous.) Because we've already got a prime grey-area example from the books, and have already had over a year to hash out the implications elsewhere on the board, I find it difficult to come up with anything really worthwhile to say, other than that you've lived up to my high expectations and hit the nail on the head. (That's the one downside to consistently doing an excellant job - people come to expect it of you!)

[Rel Fexive]

This is the most explicitly defined Bad Thing To Do, because it's been discussed in so much detail in the books.  The First Law comes a close second but is less precisely defined; all there is is the "it's like adding I am a murderer into your psyche and letting it take root" from SF.

The Second Law ultimately stems from both of these, and so is clearly Not Good for the same reasons.

The Third Law is initially more about a 'social' rather than 'spiritual' danger.  To me, "merely" reading minds doesn't automatically stain your soul, for lack of any better way of describing it; it's more about accepting the easiness of it and the sort of person you become as a result of doing it more and more.  Like the First Law, but without the killin', but still a slippery slope to the Black.

The law on necromancy (the Sixth?) is much the same, to me... embracing necromancy leads to thinking of live people as potential useful dead people, and that, again, is Not Good.

Contacting Outsiders carries the suggestion of SAN loss... and so doing it would be A Bad Idea.

The ban against time travel would seem to carry the least amount of "spiritual backlash" with it... if, of course, you consider the potential to destroy the entire universe no big thing.  The Law in particular seems far more about good sense than turning you to the Dark Side.


And there's my brief Law-shaped nutshell

[NevynK]

The last paragraph and sentence made me think bout some potentially interesting situations. Depending on whats changed it would obviously force other changes to occur in the character. Since they cant use drugs they become addicted to pain or become suicidal as they want it but cant have it cause they're too afraid, repulsed, ect or they can't pig out so they get hooked on drugs, can't watch TV anymore become a fanatic reader and go on the forums at jim-butcher.com all day long, you get the idea. Depending on who its done to and where the story is it could be used to swing it in a new direction as a character with a brand spanking new personality really changes things when it comes to decision making. The only thing I'm not clear on is in situations like these are there predetermined parameters of what we can do with the players actions as GM or is basically our choice? Within reason of course.

[Slife]

If I had a character who wanted to do this, I could make a huge legal argument about the difference between enthralling and using magic on the mind.  The examples given seem like they could be transferred just as easily to surgery, with any instance of compulsions changed to "chainsaw". 

Surgery is bad because treating cancer by cutting it out with a chainsaw kills people.  You'll sever arteries and break bones, leaving your patient a crippled, bleeding mass on the operating room table.

There's also the gray area of removing a compulsion. 

[hollow49]

If I had a character who wanted to do this, I could make a huge legal argument about the difference between enthralling and using magic on the mind.  The examples given seem like they could be transferred just as easily to surgery, with any instance of compulsions changed to "chainsaw". 

Surgery is bad because treating cancer by cutting it out with a chainsaw kills people.  You'll sever arteries and break bones, leaving your patient a crippled, bleeding mass on the operating room table.

There's also the gray area of removing a compulsion. 

The real problem with that analogy is that without practise and training, you aren't going to become a skilled surgeon, and you wouldn't want to make the attempt without suitable equipment. But there's no way to practise mental surgery on dead bodies or fakes like one does in surgical training, and (because of this) there isn't any tradition or practise with the level of skill to train others in this. (After all, that kind of knowledge hass to ultimately come from practical experience at some point in the past...) And without experience or training, to extend the metaphor, attempting surgery with crude unsterilised equipment isn't something you'd want to risk - the comparison isn't quite as blatent as your chainsaws, but is certainly far from safe and probably often fatal.

[Slife]

The real problem with that analogy is that without practise and training, you aren't going to become a skilled surgeon, and you wouldn't want to make the attempt without suitable equipment. But there's no way to practise mental surgery on dead bodies or fakes like one does in surgical training, and (because of this) there isn't any tradition or practise with the level of skill to train others in this. (After all, that kind of knowledge hass to ultimately come from practical experience at some point in the past...) And without experience or training, to extend the metaphor, attempting surgery with crude unsterilised equipment isn't something you'd want to risk - the comparison isn't quite as blatent as your chainsaws, but is certainly far from safe and probably often fatal.

Animals have minds.  So do vampires, ghouls, fairies, air spirits trapped in skulls, and all manner of non-humans.

[NevynK]

Hmmm make my dogs afraid of my hamster . I see promise

[Beamer]

Animals have minds.  So do vampires, ghouls, fairies, air spirits trapped in skulls, and all manner of non-humans.

I doubt that the mind of a non-human works the same way.
To extend this metaphor do you want a Vet preforming brain surgery

[Rel Fexive]

Exactly.  Practising on animals and then applying what you've learned to people would probably only make things even worse.  Non-corporeal spirits would be too different.  Creatures of the NeverNever, equally so.

[hollow49]

Besides, anything sufficiently similar to a human mind to be good practise would also be subject to the same ethical issues - remember, even a nonhuman might be considered close enough to warrant a violation. (If I were GMing it, I'd say that it would count as experience if and only if it also counted as a violation for accumulating "ticks" and stunts.) Remember if SF, Harry tells the Shadowman that the Fourth Law prohibits bindind another against their will - referring to Kalsharrak the demon? If even that kind of monster is deemed to be protected, then the Fourth Law gets applied with a very broad brush indeed...

Of course, there's nothing to stop some beings being bound by their own will in various ways - a contract with various powers like the Denarians, a bargain with the Leanansidhe, the mantle of a Faerie Knight, an oath sworn on ones own power - we've seen many examples in the book. All of these do apply some degree of compulsion/obligation on the bound party, but he or she chose to accept them at the time, so free will is not compromised. I'm not sure whether the Swords of the Cross belong on the list or not - my impression of those is that no futher obligation is required after the choice to take up the sword - one merely has to keep making that same choice every day, and only those capable of doing so are given the option in the first place.

[Slife]

I doubt that the mind of a non-human works the same way.
To extend this metaphor do you want a Vet preforming brain surgery

It's not like an animal neurosurgeon can't perform neurosurgery upon a human (or vice versa). 


Besides, how do you think brain surgeons practice?  They don't just start on real patients.

Of course, there's nothing to stop some beings being bound by their own will in various ways - a contract with various powers like the Denarians, a bargain with the Leanansidhe, the mantle of a Faerie Knight, an oath sworn on ones own power - we've seen many examples in the book. All of these do apply some degree of compulsion/obligation on the bound party, but he or she chose to accept them at the time, so free will is not compromised.

So, as long as someone gives permission you're pretty much free to mess around with their mind,

[NevynK]

I doubt that the mind of a non-human works the same way.
To extend this metaphor do you want a Vet preforming brain surgery

Hmmm well physiologically white court vamps are more less equal to humans so I'm sure their mental functions and thought processes aren't all that different. Creatures such as primates or spirits with similar thought processes could easily be used to practice on as they aren't human but their minds work more or less the same way. Not saying its something that should be done or that it would guarantee success while working with humans but it would mean at least a slightly better chance of success. 

[Rel Fexive]

To be fair, the brain surgery analogy only goes so far.  It's not a matter of gross brain structure but how the mind works... and the minds of non-humans, or even of White Court vamps, are different enough from those of regular humans that practising on them wouldn't get you anything more than angry Wardens on your ass.

[Jaroslav]

 While yes it might be hard to find a willing subject to practise on. But if you could find the notes of somone who already had used mind magic a lot of the work would be done for you.

Also a ghost could be a possible subject. They seem to have minds even if they are abit broken. Of course if a ghost has a mind they would probably be a little to human for most wizards to use.