Green Flame Rising (Exalted vs Dresden Files)

[Degorium]

Okay let me break this down to make sure we aren't talking past each other here. The discussion being had is on the general belief of the WC for single instance Law breakers.

1) They prefer to take law breakers to trail but the vast majority they do take to trail must already have broken the laws multiple times. The more you've broken the laws the less likely you are to be salvageable due to the reinforcing aspect of magic you are more likely to have a relapse. This isn't Harry Potter where they just know if you've used magic when they catch people it must be after they've breached them many times the vast majority of the time. If you know what your in for its easier to hide the symptoms.

1b) You need someone to vouch for you when on trail. If your put under the Doom and you breach the Laws again whomever vouched for you gets executed as well. As a result the risk factor is high and since most caught have already done so multiple times instead of being caught early on after only one case of Law breaching most get executed pretty much automatically.

This does NOT mean that the generally held belief amongst the WC is as strict as Dresden who himself generally thinks that is you've broken them even once your screwed and need to be taken care of before you cause more damage. Dresden holds such a perspective due to McCoy it isn't the norm.

Click to shrink...

Okay. I agree with your points actually but it kind of avoids what I'm getting at the white council's laws and how they enforce them are draconian. They are necessary in their construction and the way that they carry them out are also necessary that does not make them non draconian. Anyone who is even remotely aware of the white Council and is a human magic user if they are aware that they have broken any of the laws should avoid them like the plague if they even begin to suspect they even skirted the edge of a law should avoid them like the plague. Because a lot of people have no connection to the white Council as a whole and if you don't have anyone to vouch for you you will be killed.

No matter if you are just a warlock by vague single instance or by 100 usages of dark magic. They will kill you if you have no connection to the white Council how do you undergo the Doom of Damocles. The answer we get in Canon is you don't no matter how many or how few instances of dark magic that you actually have no matter how coherent or incoherent you are made by your usage of dark magic if you do not have a link in the Council you will die.

This has nothing to do really about how many times or how fucked up a warlock is or even whether or not they're salvageable but if you don't have a connection to the white Council and you get caught as a warlock the sentence no matter how light or heavy your crime is death which is the definition of draconian laws and regulations.

The rest of the white council's views don't actually matter because they're a gerontocracy run by people just as old or older than McCoy. They are the ones who decide whether you live or die when you have been captured as a warlock. While the white Council as a whole may have a more liberal stance than a single instance of dark magic is death the official stance and The Stance of the people who will decide whether you live or die is that a single instance is enough to sentence you to death.

 

[Degorium]

@BronzeTongue do you mind if i take some of that?

 

[BronzeTongue]

@BronzeTongue do you mind if i take some of that?

Click to shrink...

Yeah, go ahead. What part do you disagree with though?

The point is basically to assert the same position on community and working together being the answer to these tactics, it just frames it as something more actively assertive.

 

[BoredMan]

Okay. I agree with your points actually but it kind of avoids what I'm getting at

Click to shrink...

The disagreement had was on their generally held belief on single instance cases. I agree that the way they handle it is 'draconian' in nature but thats due to the fact that the vast majority they bring in are repeat offenders(with everything that implies), limited resources for rehabilitation attempts, and the risk imposed on whomever is vouching for you.

Edit: How they typically handle them isn't necessarily indicative of a general stance.

The rest of the white council's views don't actually matter because they're a gerontocracy run by people just as old or older than McCoy.

Click to shrink...

It does matter in Quest.

If they are given other options by Molly their generally held perspective on single case extenuating circumstance Law violaters will be extremely relevant.

 

[Degorium]

Yeah, go ahead. What part do you disagree with though?

The point is basically to assert the same position on community and working together being the answer to these tactics, it just frames it as something more actively assertive.

Click to shrink...

Largely the absence of the circumstances that surrounded Shaw even before he was mind torqued. The general separation of the material Connections in his life substantively made it considerably easier to pick him off. And accentuating those differences a very least was important in telling Carlos what the difference between the two of them were. While yours has a considerably more active tense it's just missing some of the more comforting attributes that I like about my own response. About the personal differences between the two men. As well as asserting that Shaw on some points still had agency of a lot of his own thoughts and actions on some level.

 

[Degorium]

[X] Influence comes in degrees and free will is still important, maybe the most important thing
-[X]Stunt: Looking towards the sky "The difference is and always has been what you choose, even when you don't realize it, Call it good instincts, good upbringing, or good luck, but you are not alone. They did not allow you pass, they dared not bar your way without overwhelming advantage. Shaw fought one against six and lost - but it was still a fight. Even once he was down some part of him still wanted to get up, despite the fact that he ultimately failed to." Taking a deep breath that turns into a sigh. While looking down at the table you continue.
-[X]"Horace Shaw even though he was hit with mind bending Magic was alone. Inherently these warlocks and the not-man are a nihilistic impulse loneliness, deprivation, disconnection they prey on these things. Though he was affected by mind-bending Magic he had already largely separated himself, he had no one, no friends, no confidants, no allies hell not even people he interacted with on a normal basis. He believed himself alone and in believing it made it true. We are each and every one better together. When one life flows into the next we cease being raindrops and become a storm; this they fear so much they will do anything to drive us apart." Turning to face him more fully, Molly locked eyes with him as directly as she could without a soul gaze.
-[X]"The difference between you and him is you have people around you by hook or by crook who can notice who can see you Friend, Teacher, Warden, Ally. Humanity lives and dies by the adage if you want to go far go together. When they seek to break us to pieces we will stand together, and when they seek us out alone we will hunt them down together. Cloak yourself in allies, in friendship, in love and you will find a hand reaching out to you of their own free will and as long as you have any will of your own to reach out you can be returned, inherently isn't that the truth of The Doom of Damocles. Warden Ramirez." you finished softly nearly looking directly into his eyes.

Thanks @BronzeTongue .

 

[BronzeTongue]

Largely the absence of the circumstances that surrounded Shaw even before he was mind torqued. The general separation of the material Connections in his life substantively made it considerably easier to pick him off. And accentuating those differences a very least was important in telling Carlos what the difference between the two of them were. While yours has a considerably more active tense it's just missing some of the more comforting attributes that I like about my own response. About the personal differences between the two men. As well as asserting that Shaw on some points still had agency of a lot of his own thoughts and actions on some level.

Click to shrink...

Those details aren't really rhetorically important. Sometimes you want a detailed outline, but sometimes you want a feeling. Carlos is really having a crisis stemming from some reasoned issue.

A coherent emotional message and framing for the situation is more important than touching every detail. Which is why I used touch stones instead of fully listing everything out.

 

[Degorium]

The disagreement had was on their generally held belief on single instance cases. I agree that the way they handle it is 'draconian' in nature but thats due to the fact that the vast majority they bring in are repeat offenders(with everything that implies), limited resources for rehabilitation attempts, and the risk imposed on whomever is vouching for you.

Edit: How they typically handle them it isn't necessarily indicative of a general stance.


It does matter in Quest.

If they are given other options by Molly their generally held perspective on single case extenuating circumstance Law violaters will be extremely relevant.

Click to shrink...

In Canon if you don't have a doom of Damocles you will be executed that is just what the Canon is. The default punishment for lawbreaking is death and because of the 3/4 requirement and the Damocles requirement you will be executed. It doesn't matter what what instance number they're on whether repeat offenders or not. If you are a law breaker and have no connection to the council or no one to sponsor a doom of Damocles you will die.

There are no extenuating circumstances there is nothing in Canon or by this Quest so far that seems to suggest otherwise if you are caught and do not have someone to vouch for a doom and get you three quarters of a council vote you will be executed.

The general stance of the white council is thou shall not kill. shall not swim against the tide of time. Thou shalt not X... X.. X if you were caught doing X, X or X we will kill you if one of our membership thinks that there was extenuating circumstances and is willing to take a sword to the neck on that promise maybe we will stay your execution(Maybe). This is alongside the fact that it doesn't matter if you do manage to get a doom of Damocles simply because if the council if more than 1/4 of the council believes that they are Beyond Rehabilitation despite the fact they managed to get someone to sponsor them they will be executed.

I'm of the opinion it takes way more than just being a repeat offender of the laws to actually become Beyond Rehabilitation mostly because most of the warlocks we see in Dresden Files are still mostly functional human beings some of which are just normal people who have broken the laws repeatedly and just live normal lives. If they ever interacted with the white Council they would be executed.

It matters for the future of the quest but the stances of the vast majority of the white Council don't matter for the Doom of Damocles or warlock trials because they don't have a seat or a voice in how those trials go down. Our interactions with the white Council depend on how flexible they're willing to be on extenuating circumstances if we provide a solution but at the moment it does not matter what the rest of the council's position is.

 

[BoredMan]

In Canon if you don't have a doom of Damocles you will be executed that is just what the Canon is

Click to shrink...

There are no extenuating circumstances there is nothing in Canon or by this Quest so far that seems to suggest otherwise if you are caught and do not have someone to vouch for a doom and get you three quarters of a council vote you will be executed.

Click to shrink...

Dude. You're repeating yourself for seemingly no reason at this point.

"Extenuating circumstances" such as killing a human with magic who is about to kill you in self defense. I never said you didn't need someone to vouch for you. I specifically pointed out that you do.

I don't know what your trying to prove here but this isn't evidence of any generally held belief on the White Council's part, just how Law breakers are managed which I haven't disagreed with.

It matters for the future of the quest but the stances of the vast majority of the white Council don't matter for the Doom of Damocles or warlock trials because they don't have a seat or a voice in how those trials go down.

Click to shrink...

The "generally held belief" on circumstantial single instance Law breakers by the WC would include those who vote.

 

[Degorium]

Dude. You're repeating yourself for seemingly no reason at this point.

"Extenuating circumstances" such as killing a human with magic who is about to kill you in self defense. I never said you didn't need someone to vouch for you. I specifically pointed out that you do.

I don't know what your trying to prove here but this isn't evidence of any generally held belief on the White Council's part, just how Law breakers are managed which I haven't disagreed with.

The "generally held belief" on circumstantial single instance Law breakers by the WC would include those who vote.

Click to shrink...

This whole discussion of the white council started here

Well, that bit is completely true. If your getting mind-whammied by a Warlock into doing black magic and then the nature of magic just reinforces it into you, your fucked. Sad fact of the setting which brings us back to the Crow discussion from earlier...

Probably best not to tell him that though even if it's obvious upon reflection, haha.

Click to shrink...

It doesn't happen instantly. That's largely the point of Dresden also being a warlock. He's killed people with his magic before and he's been acquitted before put under the sword of Damocles he explicitly puts Molly under the Sword of Damocles for also becoming a warlock.It takes repeated and continuous use of dark magic to become so fucked up that a person who uses it is completely unsalvageable.

Click to shrink...

Well yes, Free Will and all that. Cases like Dresden and Molly though are implied to be rare if things do get that far your normally just screwed more often than not.

Click to shrink...

With the implication that the rarity of the doom being about the severity or rehabilitatablity of Warlocks, which I refuted then you brought

Some of them may believe that but it should be kept in mind that the WC has former black magic users on it other than Dresden. One of them is with us right now even, Lady M.

Click to shrink...

Which starts on the point of individual stance on warlocks. I have at no point stated an individualist stance on warlock just an institutional stance both how they prosecute and how the laws are written.

The individual stances of members of the white Council bm don't matter to how the Warlock trials are undertaken and don't particularly matter to me the institutional stands of the white council is different from Individual member stances but individual member stances don't matter because they don't control how the laws are enforced.

The only individual stances that matter on how extenuating circumstances reflect on not killing a warlock is that of the Council of the white Council not the average membership. Their stances are shown to be not lenient in most cases considering there are a grand total of five Damocles showings in Dresden Files. This isn't talking about on the field executions or anything like that.

 

[Yog]

[X] Influence comes in degrees and free will is still important, maybe the most important thing

 

[Iron Roby]

[X] You have a heck of a lot more of a claim to being different from them than I do. The world's complicated and messy, but we do the best we can. (Quietly explain your own law-breaking)

There have been some decent attempts at stunts for the second option, but screw that option. In Dresdenverse, whether you end up a monster or not is mostly down to moral luck. Whether you get drugged with something supernatural, or mindcontrolled, or gifted with magic with no instruction, or forced to break a Law for self-defense, or etc can determine that for you, with you having very little choice about any of it. Unless you are a martyr with heroic willpower, and sometimes not even then.

Dresden is frankly an unreliable narrator about Free Will. He has to believe what he does, because he fears that making any excuses would just increase the likelihood that he would "reoffend". That's almost certainly the angle through which McCoy taught him morals and philosophy, too. Remember, he didn't go through normal apprenticeship with him, but warlock rehabilitation.

It might not be exactly what Carlos wants to hear right now, but it's the truth and sharing her past experience will soften the blow.

 

[BoredMan]

This whole discussion of the white council started here

Click to shrink...

I said that if your breaking the Laws because a Warlock is mind whamming you and your getting hit by the reinforcing nature of the Laws on top of that, your fucked.

With the implication that the rarity of the doom being about the severity or rehabilitatablity of Warlocks, which I refuted then you brought

Click to shrink...

Firstly, look at the bit of your post which I had quoted.

That isn't to say warlocks are inherently a fixable phenomenon but to say they all need to die or they must be killed is completely false.

Click to shrink...

This is what I was responding to.

---

You said that it doesn't happen instantly, that they can be saved. I responded with a yes citing Free Will. Then I stated that cases like Dresden and Molly seem to be rare.

The implication was that if someone isn't there to pull you out that even with Free Will factored in and the fact that corruption doesn't happen instantly if your already violating the Laws and don't know of the side effects, your probably going to continue doing it due to ignorance and the reinforcing aspect.

Again if someone isn't there to try pulling you out. Which in Dresden and Molly's case someone was. That's why their situations were rare. If they were both left unaddressed it probably would've escalated due to ignorance and reinforcement.

I have at no point stated an individualist stance on warlock just an institutional stance both how they prosecute and how the laws are written.

The individual stances of members of the white Council bm don't matter to how the Warlock trials are undertaken and don't particularly matter to me the institutional stands of the white council is different from Individual member stances but individual member stances don't matter because they don't control how the laws are enforced.

Click to shrink...

The point in me bringing up that Dresden isn't the only Law breaker on the Council was to draw attention to the fact that we don't know how many White Council have broken the Laws and avoided execution.

Your getting the point of contention muddied here. The general belief that the WC holds on single instance circumstantial Law breakers is important because if Molly presents more options for handling such cases and the risk are altered their views will greatly influence how they respond.

 

[Degorium]

There have been some decent attempts at stunts for the second option, but screw that option. In Dresdenverse, whether you end up a monster or not is mostly down to moral luck. Whether you get drugged with something supernatural, or mindcontrolled, or gifted with magic with no instruction, or forced to break a Law for self-defense, or etc can determine that for you, with you having very little choice about any of it. Unless you are a martyr with heroic willpower, and sometimes not even then.

Dresden is frankly an unreliable narrator about Free Will. He has to believe what he does, because he fears that making any excuses would just increase the likelihood that he would "reoffend". That's almost certainly the angle through which McCoy taught him morals and philosophy, too. Remember, he didn't go through normal apprenticeship with him, but rehabilitation.

It might not be exactly what Carlos want's to hear right now, but it's the truth and sharing her past experience will soften the blow.

Click to shrink...

On some level that is completely true but on most levels there are actions you can take as a wizard to not end up a monster that are just not open to most people a lot of the time. In this Quest alone the Reds Venom is enough to offset warlock corruption it replaces it with Red Venom addiction but it does mean that you were no longer being Twisted by your own dark magic.

There are also gods that you can pray to /reach out to that would be willing to take you under their wing Odin in specific is an example of this considering he taught Merlin not to mention the presence of God who has no reason not to reach out if you reach out first and you have the power to actually reach out into Realms beyond your own.

The fairies if you're willing to pay the cost can offset the Warlock penalties and then there's also just discipline. It might come down to moral luck a lot of the time but there are options that exist that don't require martyrdom level willpower. A lot of those options are just don't be fucking alone stewing in dark magic. Reach out to someone anyone that isn't also stewing in dark magic.

Dresden is fully capable of summoning angels with a circle if a warlock believes themselves to be degenerating and does not wish to degenerate any further there is nothing stopping them from doing the same. This reeks of pull yourself up by your bootstrap shit but it is largely the truth because well lore on summoning angels has been in circulation since fuck when did the Lesser key of Solomon come out like in the 15th century and there are modern versions of Ars Almadel you can find a PDF form online. Then again you can also just contract Devils if you were a warlock we want to keep your sensibilities as well and if you do not believe in an angel would help you a devil would be definitely willing to help you for probably less than your soul.

That isn't to say you can't be completely fucked up but you know there's way more than luck at work there because dark magic just makes you more of what you already are doing. In Dresden Files we see lawbreakers that are both completely nuts and just regular people. So it's not like breaking the law once twice maybe even a couple dozen times turned you into a maniac you have to be rampantly doing greater acts of dark magic often to be dragged into the muck so completely.

 

[Degorium]

Your getting the point of contention muddied here. The general belief that the WC holds on single instance circumstantial Law breakers is important because if Molly presents more options for handling such cases and the risk are altered their views will greatly influence how they respond.

Click to shrink...

The only stance that matters until we present an alternative is the Institutional stance.

This comes back to the absolutist stance on how the laws of magic work if you get caught breaking or having broken any of the laws the assumed punishment is death. The Doom is a leniency it does not change the official stance.

Click to shrink...

I feel like I've said it but the individual stances are important but they aren't as important as institutional stances you were talking about a future and it's a future that can come really soon as far as the quest goes but I'm talking about in the moment the institutional stance of the white council is that if you are caught breaking any of the laws you will die. This can prevented by having some kind of connection to the white Council beforehand but both of the prosecution and the text of the law that the white Council follows is death is the punishment.
Whether this institutional stance can be changed does depend on individual memberships thoughts on lawbreaking but I wasn't talking about the future I was talking about the present and the current stance of the white Council on lawbreakers as an institution.
I don't know the individual stances of any of the white Council other than Dresden and even his is kind of strict as you have mentioned but I imagine he's not the only one.

 

[BoredMan]

The only stance that matters until we present an alternative is the Institutional stance.

Click to shrink...

There is the general perspective on such cases held by the majority of the White Council and then there's how they respond to such cases on an institutional level.

These can be two different things.

I've provided reasoning for how they can hold at present a different stance other than 'if you use black magic even once your damned for life' while still having the MO of killing the vast majority of Warlocks they bring in.

Spoiler: Quote

I agree that the way they handle it is 'draconian' in nature but thats due to the fact that the vast majority they bring in are repeat offenders(with everything that implies), limited resources for rehabilitation attempts, and the risk imposed on whomever is vouching for you.

Edit: How they typically handle them isn't necessarily indicative of a general stance.

Click to shrink...

I don't know the individual stances of any of the white Council other than Dresden and even his is kind of strict as you have mentioned but I imagine he's not the only one.

Click to shrink...

Yes. As I've said some probably do hold that belief. Doesn't mean it's the generally held position.

 

[Iron Roby]

On some level that is completely true but on most levels there are actions you can take as a wizard to not end up a monster that are just not open to most people a lot of the time.

Click to shrink...

Regarding human mages, I meant it less about someone like Horace Shaw, and more about someone like Hannah Ascher.

If the default belief was that single instance cases always needed to be executed they wouldn't put them on trail with the possibility of getting parole. They'd just kill them.

Click to shrink...

Personally, I don't think the Council thinks that single instances make someone irredeemable and in need of execution, I think that they think single instances make someone irredeemable and in need of execution unless someone is willing to literally bet their life on rehabilitating them. But that means that the default assumption is that, without such extremely motivated supervision, even a justified violation of the Laws is too dangerous to tolerate the violator living.

So they are willing to consider some pragmatic leniency, but their bar for guarantees for allowing such leniency is extremal high. Any potential alternative solution we offer, is going to have to take that institutional paranoia into account.

 

[BoredMan]

I think that they think single instances make someone irredeemable and in need of execution unless someone is willing to literally bet their life on rehabilitating them. But that means that the default assumption is that, without such extremely motivated supervision, even a justified violation of the Laws is too dangerous to tolerate the violator living.

Click to shrink...

That doesn't work. If someone is irredeemable because of something they did then rehabilitation is not an option. You wouldn't put someone's life on the line to try you'd just kill them because by definition there's no point.

They can't be irredeemable and rehabilitable. You can't have it both ways.

Edit:

So they are willing to consider some pragmatic leniency, but their bar for guarantees for allowing such leniency is extremal high. Any potential alternative solution we offer, is going to have to take that institutional paranoia into account.

Click to shrink...

I agree with this bit btw. Just not the belief that the WC sees such rare cases as irredeemable.

 

[Azais]

[X] BronzeTongue

[X] You have a heck of a lot more of a claim to being different from them than I do. The world's complicated and messy, but we do the best we can. (Quietly explain your own law-breaking)

[X] You have a heck of a lot more of a claim to being different from them than I do. The world's complicated and messy, but we do the best we can. (Quietly explain your own law-breaking)

There have been some decent attempts at stunts for the second option, but screw that option. In Dresdenverse, whether you end up a monster or not is mostly down to moral luck. Whether you get drugged with something supernatural, or mindcontrolled, or gifted with magic with no instruction, or forced to break a Law for self-defense, or etc can determine that for you, with you having very little choice about any of it. Unless you are a martyr with heroic willpower, and sometimes not even then.

Dresden is frankly an unreliable narrator about Free Will. He has to believe what he does, because he fears that making any excuses would just increase the likelihood that he would "reoffend". That's almost certainly the angle through which McCoy taught him morals and philosophy, too. Remember, he didn't go through normal apprenticeship with him, but warlock rehabilitation.

It might not be exactly what Carlos wants to hear right now, but it's the truth and sharing her past experience will soften the blow.

Click to shrink...

These words resonate with my original thinking and I really liked BronzeTongue's writing so I'll vote for both of them.

 

[Iron Roby]

They can't be irredeemable and rehabilitable. You can't have it both ways.

Click to shrink...

Yes, but you can be irredeemable unless involving great risk and effort and rehabilitable. Think of it like some type of drug addiction that is curable, but only through special risky therapy. So that means without that special therapy, the addiction might as well be incurable by default.

And it's clear that the White Council consider warlock rehabilitation a very risky therapy. The Doom is not there for sadism, it's to motivate the Wizard guarantor to take the duty seriously and to consider carefully before even taking it.

Obviously, offering to go under Damocles for someone like Harry or Molly is less risky, than for a warlock so far gone it might as well be suicide, but some of that risk is still there. And while I don't think Wizards are cowards, you don't get to grow old by taking unnecessary risks to your survival.

Even to save someone who clearly broke the Laws just for self-defense, the Council still forces you to risk execution to do it. And they probably think they still do so for a good reason.

 

[BoredMan]

Yes, but you can be irredeemable without involving risk and effort and rehabilitable. Think of it like some type of drug addiction that is curable, but only through special risky therapy. So that means without that special therapy, the addiction might as well be incurable by default.

Click to shrink...

No you can't.

By definition if you're irredeemable you are without the possibility of redemption. Someone with a drug addiction can be cured with therapy because they aren't irredeemable. People retain that capacity.

Look, you either believe that using black magic even once regardless of circumstance means you can't be saved and are thus 'irredeemable' or you don't and it goes by a case by case basis.

Which is why they do a trail and why the Doom exist. "Might as well be irredeemable" and irredeemable are two very different things. In one case you're still redeemable in the other you aren't. There's no in-between here that's just the definition of the words.

And it's clear that the White Council consider warlock rehabilitation a very risky therapy. The Doom is not there for sadism, it's to motivate the Wizard guarantor to take the duty seriously and to consider carefully before even taking it.

Obviously, offering to go under Damocles for someone like Harry or Molly is less risky, than for a warlock so far gone it might as well be suicide, but some of that risk is still there. And while I don't think Wizards are cowards, you don't get to grow old by taking unnecessary risks to your survival.

Even to save someone who clearly broke the Laws just for self-defense, the Council still forces you to risk execution to do it. And they probably think they still do so for a good reason.

Click to shrink...

I agree with all of this yes. This is most likely the generally held stance on such and part of the reason why most who get put on trail get executed.

The fact that it's on the table at all means using black magic does not automatically make you doomed for life in their eyes. It's a case by case basis.

 

[Degorium]

These can be two different things.

I've provided reasoning for how they can hold at present a different stance other than 'if you use black magic even once your damned for life' while still having the MO of killing the vast majority of Warlocks they bring in.

Click to shrink...

I Fully agree but I've only made institutional statements because I literally can't speak with any level of confidence towards individual sentiment of white council membership. The institutional stance is clear. How flexible that stance will be if/when we bring forth an alternative will rely on those individual sentiments but largely only of the Senior membership.

 

[Iron Roby]

There's no in-between here that's just the definition of the words.

Click to shrink...

I'm not using just a word, but a phrase, though? "Irredeemable without serious risk and effort" - if you are only arguing with the "irredeemable" part, then you are missing half the meaning?

It's like if I said "This door cannot be opened ever, unless you use the Brass Key", then it was somehow wrong to use the first part of the sentence by definition. When it's actually fine to state a rule and then immediately add an exception.

I agree with all of this yes.

Click to shrink...

I'm glad and I think we are just arguing semantics at this point

 

[BoredMan]

I'm glad and I think we are just arguing semantics at this point

Click to shrink...

Upon reflection that does seem to be the case.

 

[firefrog600]

This whole discussion of the white council started here



With the implication that the rarity of the doom being about the severity or rehabilitatablity of Warlocks, which I refuted then you brought

Which starts on the point of individual stance on warlocks. I have at no point stated an individualist stance on warlock just an institutional stance both how they prosecute and how the laws are written.

The individual stances of members of the white Council bm don't matter to how the Warlock trials are undertaken and don't particularly matter to me the institutional stands of the white council is different from Individual member stances but individual member stances don't matter because they don't control how the laws are enforced.

The only individual stances that matter on how extenuating circumstances reflect on not killing a warlock is that of the Council of the white Council not the average membership. Their stances are shown to be not lenient in most cases considering there are a grand total of five Damocles showings in Dresden Files. This isn't talking about on the field executions or anything like that.

Click to shrink...

senior council if you forgot the word.