Dresden Files: Winter is coming (Cold Days Spoilers)

[CarpeGuitarrem]

Again; the Laws of Magic have nothing to do with morality; otherwise they would also cover more aspects.

I don't actually find this to be a conclusive line of reasoning. It would only logically follow if the Laws of Magic were morally comprehensive. It could be that they're intended as a bullet-point list of the worst ways that you can morally warp yourself through magic.

[Cikomyr]

I don't actually find this to be a conclusive line of reasoning. It would only logically follow if the Laws of Magic were morally comprehensive. It could be that they're intended as a bullet-point list of the worst ways that you can morally warp yourself through magic.

But they are NOT. That is the point everybody is making. The Laws of Magic are NOT morally comprehensive.

[Cikomyr]

Which brings me back to my question about how Wizards view breaking the laws via death curse. If the laws are VIEWED as a moral guideline, then killing with a death curse makes you a warlock, even though practically speaking it dosn't really matter.

No. The Laws are TAUGHT as a moral guidelines, but as a Wizard gets older and wiser, he knows better and understand the actual practicality of the Laws.

A Death Curse's effect is irrelevant, since it actually kills the Wizard using it. Therefore; no risk of corruption, no Laws need to be enforced.

[BRC]

No. The Laws are TAUGHT as a moral guidelines, but as a Wizard gets older and wiser, he knows better and understand the actual practicality of the Laws.

A Death Curse's effect is irrelevant, since it actually kills the Wizard using it. Therefore; no risk of corruption, no Laws need to be enforced.

I'm not talking about enforcement, I'm talking about how the action is viewed.

For example, if a Wizard and an apprentice are under the Doom of Damocles, and the wizard uses a lethal death curse, is their apprentice killed? Is the Wizard viewed as a Warlock or as a Wizard who killed a foe with their dying breath.

Are Wardens taught to use their Death Curses to kill their enemies because they're dead anyway? Or are they taught that using magic to kill is ALWAYS wrong, even when there is no chance of corruption.

The Blackstaff is kept secret from the rest of the council. Is this because the council wants to hide it's superweapon, or because they want to preach that the Laws of Magic are a moral code rather than a safety manual.

[CarpeGuitarrem]

@Cikomyr: That's what I mean, though; your logic was "the Laws aren't moral imperatives, because they aren't morally comprehensive", but I don't think that follows. They're not comprehensive because they're imperfect laws, but there's still a moral imperative inherent in them. I don't think that everything Harry was talking about, with how magic changes who you are (which is very much a theme of the series at this point), was meaningless.

So they are moral imperatives, but they're incomplete and imperfect.

[Soras Teva Gee]

They ARE a safety manual, but I got the impression that some wizards were taught to think of them as moral guidelines.

I'd say that's pretty damn definite.

Though aside from being a generally good idea... well any good engineer builds the biggest margin of error into their guidelines they can so that when the inevitable occurs it (hopefully) is already accounted for and hopefully nothing bad actually happens.

Its why say gun safety stresses you don't even point a completely unloaded weapon at someone you don't plan on shooting.

I'd not be suprised if say you actually could be brought up on First Law violation for using the Ways to position yourself to kill someone with a gun. Even if it doesn't technically have the sort of negative feedback loop sort of thing of Dresdenverse magical theory, you did still use magic to assist you in freaking murder. Clearly your mindset is not all hunky-dory, and just how slippery is that slope?

Obviously potential extenuating circumstances abound in a real imperfect world and are extended for say Wardens in pursuit of duties... but I'd not be surprised either for anything with even a hint of grey has actually been prosecuted at some point.

Safety Margin.

[BRC]

I'd say that's pretty damn definite.

Though aside from being a generally good idea... well any good engineer builds the biggest margin of error into their guidelines they can so that when the inevitable occurs it (hopefully) is already accounted for and hopefully nothing bad actually happens.

Its why say gun safety stresses you don't even point a completely unloaded weapon at someone you don't plan on shooting.

I'd not be suprised if say you actually could be brought up on First Law violation for using the Ways to position yourself to kill someone with a gun. Even if it doesn't technically have the sort of negative feedback loop sort of thing of Dresdenverse magical theory, you did still use magic to assist you in freaking murder. Clearly your mindset is not all hunky-dory, and just how slippery is that slope?

Obviously potential extenuating circumstances abound in a real imperfect world and are extended for say Wardens in pursuit of duties... but I'd not be surprised either for anything with even a hint of grey has actually been prosecuted at some point.

Safety Margin.

If that were the case Morgan would have chopped Harry's head off long ago, since it could be argued that anything Harry does that ends in somebody dying he "Used magic to facilitate".

For example, that sorceror from Grave Peril (I think). Harry uses magic to find the sorceror, Harry and SI go in and capture him, he commits suicide.
If neither Intent nor Method matter, then that's a first law violation. Sure Harry did not kill Kravos, Kravos killed himself, but Harry used magic which led to Kravos' capture and eventual death.

If Harry blocked a bullet with his shield, then fired back, that would be a First Law Violation.

Harry used magic during the raid on the Black Court Nest, Renfields (Technically human) were killed there. That would be a First Law Violation.

[Cikomyr]

I'm not talking about enforcement, I'm talking about how the action is viewed.

For example, if a Wizard and an apprentice are under the Doom of Damocles, and the wizard uses a lethal death curse, is their apprentice killed? Is the Wizard viewed as a Warlock or as a Wizard who killed a foe with their dying breath.

It has been demonstrated in the Books that the Apprentice would be executed if his Master dies; in any possible way.

Are Wardens taught to use their Death Curses to kill their enemies because they're dead anyway? Or are they taught that using magic to kill is ALWAYS wrong, even when there is no chance of corruption.

You can use magic to Kill in self-defense. I hardly see how, practically, a Death Curse is worse than surviving after?

The Blackstaff is kept secret from the rest of the council. Is this because the council wants to hide it's superweapon, or because they want to preach that the Laws of Magic are a moral code rather than a safety manual.

That's a very good question. I'd argue that those who should concern themselves over the Blackstaff are probably already aware of its existence. Therefore, I suspect it's more about keeping it secret from the Wizards at large.

The reason? It probably have to do with the actual danger the weapon itself represents. If I remember its description right, the weapon had a manevolent life and sentience of its own. The Senior Council probably don't want to see lesser-tiered Wizards experiment with magical items that might recreate the Blackstaff's Black Magic Magnet properties; as such a vessel might end up a dangerous weapon in the hands of a Warlock.

@Cikomyr: That's what I mean, though; your logic was "the Laws aren't moral imperatives, because they aren't morally comprehensive", but I don't think that follows. They're not comprehensive because they're imperfect laws, but there's still a moral imperative inherent in them. I don't think that everything Harry was talking about, with how magic changes who you are (which is very much a theme of the series at this point), was meaningless.

So they are moral imperatives, but they're incomplete and imperfect.

No. The moral imperatives has been tacked onto the Practical aspects of the Laws of Magic. The morality aspect of these laws is nothing but an aspect; a mean of teaching, of remembering. Like it's been argued up-there, they are a redundancy tool to try and keep the youths from violating them that goes beyond the mere explanation of practicality.

The Laws are not enforced based on Morality. They are not enforced based on Right or Wrong. You may have the best intentions in the world while violating the Third Law (redeeming a serial killer into Mother Theresa) and you would still have your head chopped.

Why? Because using magic to modify someone's mind just made you more likely to just twist peoples around you to your desires. Because you used your willpower to change someone's core personality, and that use of yourself changed you into someone more likely to do it again.

Black Magic is like heroin. It's addictive. The special clause regarding self-defense is also practical: someone who kills in cold-blood using magic had murderous intent. His willpower was focused on taking someone's life. Someone who kills in self-defense had his willpower focused on preserving his own skin.

The self-defense clause is not a case of morality; it's a case of practicality.

[Tavar]

So they are moral imperatives, but they're incomplete and imperfect.

Except, as brought up by Luccio, they're explicitly not moral laws. They can be viewed that way, but that is not the intent behind them, and someone suggesting that it is/should be is viewed as a danger by the council.

I'd not be suprised if say you actually could be brought up on First Law violation for using the Ways to position yourself to kill someone with a gun. Even if it doesn't technically have the sort of negative feedback loop sort of thing of Dresdenverse magical theory, you did still use magic to assist you in freaking murder. Clearly your mindset is not all hunky-dory, and just how slippery is that slope?

Obviously potential extenuating circumstances abound in a real imperfect world and are extended for say Wardens in pursuit of duties... but I'd not be surprised either for anything with even a hint of grey has actually been prosecuted at some point.

Safety Margin.

Except that's really not how the laws are implemented. I mean, by that logic, all killings should be treated that way. But they aren't. Because, as stated in the books themselves, by the former head of the Wardens, the laws are most certainly not moral in nature.

[Cikomyr]

If that were the case Morgan would have chopped Harry's head off long ago, since it could be argued that anything Harry does that ends in somebody dying he "Used magic to facilitate".

For example, that sorceror from Grave Peril (I think). Harry uses magic to find the sorceror, Harry and SI go in and capture him, he commits suicide.
If neither Intent nor Method matter, then that's a first law violation. Sure Harry did not kill Kravos, Kravos killed himself, but Harry used magic which led to Kravos' capture and eventual death.

If Harry blocked a bullet with his shield, then fired back, that would be a First Law Violation.

Harry used magic during the raid on the Black Court Nest, Renfields (Technically human) were killed there. That would be a First Law Violation.

That's a silly argument. Harry's magic was used to Locate Kravos. The manifestation of his willpower was meant to find the wrongdoer and his victims.

Had Harry somehow managed to locate part of Kravos's hair and used it to make him explode from the inside out through Thaumaturgy; it would have been a clear violation of the Laws of Magic; as Harry's manifestation of willpower was one meant for murder. No matter the reasons behind them.

The Laws does not care if magic is used to "facilitate" crime. The Laws are about controlling Wizard's behaviour so that the manifestation of their willpower does not lead them down a slippery slope.

[BRC]

The self-defense clause is not a case of morality; it's a case of practicality.

And yet killing in self-defense is still enough to get Harry branded a Warlock for life and put under the Doom of Damocles.



That said, I kind of wonder if the Laws apply to Harry anymore. I mean, clearly the Council could not enforce them on him, he's the Winter Knight after all. I suppose his magic is still fundamentally mortal, so he would still get corrupted.

What about Molly though. She's now has to abide by whatever rules control the Winter Lady, but shouldn't her magic be Faerie now? Which means The Laws shouldn't affect her.

Also it should mean she can avoid screwing up mortal technology.

Unless we go with the "Battery Pack" view of Mantles, which is to say Molly is STILL just as much a mortal wizard as she was before, she just now has the Winter Lady Mantle feeding her power. So she has both her wizard-powers AND winter lady powers. So she still screws up technology (because she's still a wizard).

[CarpeGuitarrem]

No. The moral imperatives has been tacked onto the Practical aspects of the Laws of Magic. The morality aspect of these laws is nothing but an aspect; a mean of teaching, of remembering. Like it's been argued up-there, they are a redundancy tool to try and keep the youths from violating them that goes beyond the mere explanation of practicality.

The Laws are not enforced based on Morality. They are not enforced based on Right or Wrong. You may have the best intentions in the world while violating the Third Law (redeeming a serial killer into Mother Theresa) and you would still have your head chopped.

Why? Because using magic to modify someone's mind just made you more likely to just twist peoples around you to your desires. Because you used your willpower to change someone's core personality, and that use of yourself changed you into someone more likely to do it again.

Black Magic is like heroin. It's addictive. The special clause regarding self-defense is also practical: someone who kills in cold-blood using magic had murderous intent. His willpower was focused on taking someone's life. Someone who kills in self-defense had his willpower focused on preserving his own skin.

The self-defense clause is not a case of morality; it's a case of practicality.

I guess it's a matter of definitions, then. To me, "this magic will warp you and make you more likely to do these awful things, so don't do it" is most definitely a moral imperative. Morality doesn't come from an abstract standard, but is rooted in reality. At least, that's my take.

The idea is that some things are immoral irregardless of their intent, and when magic is involved, that directly warps your soul.

[Tavar]

That said, I kind of wonder if the Laws apply to Harry anymore. I mean, clearly the Council could not enforce them on him, he's the Winter Knight after all. I suppose his magic is still fundamentally mortal, so he would still get corrupted.

What about Molly though. She's now has to abide by whatever rules control the Winter Lady, but shouldn't her magic be Faerie now? Which means The Laws shouldn't affect her.

Also it should mean she can avoid screwing up mortal technology.

Unless we go with the "Battery Pack" view of Mantles, which is to say Molly is STILL just as much a mortal wizard as she was before, she just now has the Winter Lady Mantle feeding her power. So she has both her wizard-powers AND winter lady powers. So she still screws up technology (because she's still a wizard).

I think the battery pack thing only applies to the knight mantles(as those wielders will still be human). The laws would almost certainly still apply to Harry(as he is still capable of being a member of the White Council). Molly, on the other hand, almost certainly does not count as human any more. She's just like the former summer Lady, or even more applicable, Mab or the former winter lady.

I guess it's a matter of definitions, then. To me, "this magic will warp you and make you more likely to do these awful things, so don't do it" is most definitely a moral imperative. Morality doesn't come from an abstract standard, but is rooted in reality. At least, that's my take.

The idea is that some things are immoral irregardless of their intent, and when magic is involved, that directly warps your soul.

I don't know. At that point you're basically saying any rule ever is a moral rule, which dilutes the meaning somewhat.

[Cikomyr]

And yet killing in self-defense is still enough to get Harry branded a Warlock for life and put under the Doom of Damocles.

But it allowed enough wiggle room to have someone stand up to him instead of having his head summarily chopped off.

That said, I kind of wonder if the Laws apply to Harry anymore. I mean, clearly the Council could not enforce them on him, he's the Winter Knight after all. I suppose his magic is still fundamentally mortal, so he would still get corrupted.

The Laws always apply to Harry. Stop seeing the "Laws" of magic as some sort of legal document drawn up by the White Council. The Laws of Magic are akin to the Laws of Physics; they represent a set of behaviour that will cause any Mortal Wizard's eventual downfall into madness.

Now, your question was: is Harry still under the jurisdiction of the White Council? I dunno. Maybe it's a choice he has to make; if he wants to remain a voice in the White Council, he has to subject himself to their rules.

What about Molly though. She's now has to abide by whatever rules control the Winter Lady, but shouldn't her magic be Faerie now? Which means The Laws shouldn't affect her.

Well... the Lady Mantle is going to transform her; slowly but surely. I do not think she is no longer at risk of being corrupted by Black Magic (as described by the Laws of Magic), as the Lady of Winter's personallity will just rewrite itself on top of it.

But then, the real danger for Molly now is remaining Molly, and no Maeve Carpenter.

Unless we go with the "Battery Pack" view of Mantles, which is to say Molly is STILL just as much a mortal wizard as she was before, she just now has the Winter Lady Mantle feeding her power. So she has both her wizard-powers AND winter lady powers. So she still screws up technology (because she's still a wizard).

Damn it, I should read the entire post before replying to it and cutting it in parts to reply point by points.

[BRC]

But it allowed enough wiggle room to have someone stand up to him instead of having his head summarily chopped off.




The Laws always apply to Harry. Stop seeing the "Laws" of magic as some sort of legal document drawn up by the White Council. The Laws of Magic are akin to the Laws of Physics; they represent a set of behaviour that will cause any Mortal Wizard's eventual downfall into madness.

Now, your question was: is Harry still under the jurisdiction of the White Council? I dunno. Maybe it's a choice he has to make; if he wants to remain a voice in the White Council, he has to subject himself to their rules.

Jurisdiction, maybe. However Enforcement would be an issue, he's the Winter knight. Sending Wardens to chop off his head would be an act of war, especially if he broke the laws under Mab's orders.

That was not what I was wondering about. I was wondering about the practical aspects, would breaking the Laws corrupt Harry. I settled on Yes, because he is still fundamentally a Mortal wizard.

That said, I think Harry is no longer on the Council. He's the Winter Knight now, and you can't serve two masters.


Molly is the trickier issue, because unlike Knights, Ladies are not mortal (apparently? Before Cold Days it was always assumed that the Queens were born Sidhe, but apparently they can be Mortals). WOJ said that when Fix and Lilly got their mantles, Fix chose to be mortal and Lily chose to be Fairy in order to accept the mantles. Molly is not a changeling, so it's unknown if the mantle physically changes her.

[Tavar]

That said, I think Harry is no longer on the Council. He's the Winter Knight now, and you can't serve two masters.

Going by the gatekeeper's actions in the last book, patently false.

Molly is the trickier issue, because unlike Knights, Ladies are not mortal (apparently? Before Cold Days it was always assumed that the Queens were born Sidhe, but apparently they can be Mortals). WOJ said that when Fix and Lilly got their mantles, Fix chose to be mortal and Lily chose to be Fairy in order to accept the mantles. Molly is not a changeling, so it's unknown if the mantle physically changes her.

What? Why would you assume something that was patently false from the book that introduced the characters(Summer Knight). Yeah, Fix and Lilly were changelings, but that means they aren't Fairy. In fact, given everything else, it would seem to imply that they are mostly human, maybe akin to Werewolves.

[Cikomyr]

Jurisdiction, maybe. However Enforcement would be an issue, he's the Winter knight. Sending Wardens to chop off his head would be an act of war, especially if he broke the laws under Mab's orders.

That was not what I was wondering about. I was wondering about the practical aspects, would breaking the Laws corrupt Harry. I settled on Yes, because he is still fundamentally a Mortal wizard.

That said, I think Harry is no longer on the Council. He's the Winter Knight now, and you can't serve two masters.


Molly is the trickier issue, because unlike Knights, Ladies are not mortal (apparently? Before Cold Days it was always assumed that the Queens were born Sidhe, but apparently they can be Mortals). WOJ said that when Fix and Lilly got their mantles, Fix chose to be mortal and Lily chose to be Fairy in order to accept the mantles. Molly is not a changeling, so it's unknown if the mantle physically changes her.

Ah, good question then.

Well... if I had to guess, Harry may still fall to Black Magic influence if he violates the Law. But if he does start to slip into madness, he will stop fighting against the influence of the Winter Knight Mantle and succumb to its personality.

The danger is no longer Harry becoming a Warlock, but a superpowered Slayte

[Cikomyr]

What? Why would you assume something that was patently false from the book that introduced the characters(Summer Knight). Yeah, Fix and Lilly were changelings, but that means they aren't Fairy. In fact, given everything else, it would seem to imply that they are mostly human, maybe akin to Werewolves.

I toyed with an idea: what if all of the Fairies (except maybe the Mothers) were mortal at one point? What if Changelings are the only way for the Sidhe to reproduce and replenish their numbers?

That would explain why they remain so close to our world. Why they need to come and step into our world once a year.

[Soras Teva Gee]

If that were the case Morgan would have chopped Harry's head off long ago, since it could be argued that anything Harry does that ends in somebody dying he "Used magic to facilitate".

Except that's really not how the laws are implemented. I mean, by that logic, all killings should be treated that way. But they aren't. Because, as stated in the books themselves, by the former head of the Wardens, the laws are most certainly not moral in nature.

Ahem:

Obviously potential extenuating circumstances abound in a real imperfect world and are extended for say Wardens in pursuit of duties...

I addressed all that already. Wardens were only one example, not the only one.

Also all laws are moral in nature, Luccio can claim they aren't all she wants, but that's more like "lowest common denominator" then actually so. Even the choice to not permit homicidal maniacs twisted by black magic run around is a moral choice. All laws are moral in this regard. They are the choice to enforce a collective judgement on an individual, that few people ever dispute certain basics does not change this.

Now if the purpose of the laws as legislation (not simply their inevitable results) is to limit the damage magic users can do to humanity... then heck yes I expect the White Council can indeed find it in their hidebound hearts to chop your head off for straight up no excuses premeditated m-u-r-d-e-r murder even if the magical involvement is not technically black magic in the magical physics sense.

Remember they are still human and still the good guys.

Course without being actual black magic I'd imagine a lot of their detection methods don't nessecarily trigger and enforcement would be spotty. But say within the council in a big way well heck that's probably what Morgan would have gone down for on paper. (IIRC no magic was actually used to kill La Fortier)

[BRC]

What? Why would you assume something that was patently false from the book that introduced the characters(Summer Knight). Yeah, Fix and Lilly were changelings, but that means they aren't Fairy. In fact, given everything else, it would seem to imply that they are mostly human, maybe akin to Werewolves.

Except that once a Changeling chooses, they literally and permanently transform. They become either 100% Fairy or 100% Human.

Remember Meril (Lilly and Fix's Friend). She chose her Fairy side and turned into a troll.

Before I had assumed (Also I heard WoJ somewhere) That Lilly Chose to be Fairy when she became the Winter lady. I had assumed that was a neccessary part, since only a Faerie could bear the mantle. She went from Changeling to Fairy by the normal process of a Changeling choosing to embrace their Fairie half.
Lilly could have become a Fairy without the mantle.

Molly is 100% Human. The question is does the mantle turn her into a Sidhe (The "Fair Folk" species of Faerie that most of the Winter and Summer court nobles seem to be, as opposed to Trolls, Ogres, Centaurs, ect), or does she remain primarily Human.

[Tavar]

Except that once a Changeling chooses, they literally and permanently transform. They become either 100% Fairy or 100% Human.

Right....but they are not born a Sidhe. If they were, they would not have to chose, because they would be 100% Fairy. Words actually mean things!

Molly is 100% Human. The question is does the mantle turn her into a Sidhe (The "Fair Folk" species of Faerie that most of the Winter and Summer court nobles seem to be, as opposed to Trolls, Ogres, Centaurs, ect), or does she remain primarily Human.

Perhaps looking to the books, where we have Mab, as well as possibly the former winter Lady to provide examples.

[BRC]

Going by the gatekeeper's actions in the last book, patently false.



What? Why would you assume something that was patently false from the book that introduced the characters(Summer Knight). Yeah, Fix and Lilly were changelings, but that means they aren't Fairy. In fact, given everything else, it would seem to imply that they are mostly human, maybe akin to Werewolves.

Right....but they are not born a Sidhe. If they were, they would not have to chose, because they would be 100% Fairy. Words actually mean things!

Perhaps looking to the books, where we have Mab, as well as possibly the former winter Lady to provide examples.

Maeve was Sidhe, before Cold Days I assumed that she had always been so.

And You should read what I'm actually saying. Lily could have become a Sidhe Without the mantle. There was a WoJ that said she Chose when she got the Mantle. There is currently no known way for a pure mortal to become a faerie (unless it turns out the mantles do that,
Which is what I'm wondering).

A changeling can become a fairy without a mantle, so just because we see two Ladies Who were formerly Changelings does Not mean that the mantle itself transforms the bearer, since a Changeling could become a Fairy anyway.

Mab says she was once mortal, she too could have been a Changeling, who was transformed by her Choice, rather than the Mantle.

Molly is the first 100% human we have met who becomes a Fairy Queen.

Maeve berates her sister for never choosing, do it stands to reason that Maeve did choose.

A changeling is already defined by their abilit to become a fae, so seeing changelings becoming fae with mantles does not prove that a
Mantle can transform a human. It seems likely, but it's not proven.

[Tavar]

Maeve was Sidhe, before Cold Days I assumed that she had always been so.

And.....? Seriously, your statement doesn't seem to make sense unless you're arguing that we should just discount books.

And You should read what I'm actually saying. Lily could have become a Sidhe Without the mantle. There was a WoJ that said she Chose when she got the Mantle. There is currently no known way for a pure mortal to become a faerie (unless it turns out the mantles do that,
Which is what I'm wondering).

I am: you said that they had been born a sidhe, which is false. It'd be like saying that someone had been born a warlock. No, they're born a wizard, who can become a warlock depending on how they use their power.

Can you provide the WOJ? The closet thing I remember to that was, I believe, in Cold Days, where Bob talks about it, seems to imply that they didn't so much chose as the mantle was a choice in itself.

Also, I'd question the faire thing, as I believe it's implied several times that there are transformations that can be done(Harry's Godmother, the Wyld Hunt, etc).

[BRC]

And.....? Seriously, your statement doesn't seem to make sense unless you're arguing that we should just discount books.


I am: you said that they had been born a sidhe, which is false. It'd be like saying that someone had been born a warlock. No, they're born a wizard, who can become a warlock depending on how they use their power.

Before Cold Days I have assumed Mab and Maeve were born Sidhe. NOW I assume they were born as Changelings and became Sidhe. Please actually read my posts. You keep saying I'm ignoring the books. Which books am I ignoring? Where does it say that a Changeling is just like a human? That a changeling can NOT become a farie by Choosing? Because I thought that was kind of the point of being a Changeling, you need to choose to become either Faerie or Human.
Also, please read when I say "Before Cold Days I assumed X". Don't blame me for having ignored revelations from Cold Days before it came out. Because you're either doing that, or not understanding what I mean by "Changeling".


There is a difference between Changelings, Humans, and Sidhe. However, if a Changeling with a Sidhe parent chooses to become a Farie, they become a full Sidhe, just like somebody who was Born as a Sidhe (Assuming that happens. It's possible all Faries were once Changelings, but this has not been stated anywhere I Can remember).



Which does NOT proove that the mantle can turn an ordinary human into a Sidhe. It proves that a Changeling can recieve the Mantle, and then become a Sidhe. It could imply that the Mantle forces the Changeling to become a Faerie.

However, there is already a mechanism in place for a Changeling to become a Faerie. There is no such mechanism for a mortal like Molly (Unless the Mantle counts, which is what I'm wondering).

How do YOU think Dresdenverse Changelings work? Because I think they choose, and if they choose Faerie they become whatever type of fae their parent was, and if they choose human they become fully human.

The Queens are Sidhe.
Lilly was a Changeling, let's assume she had a Sidhe parent. She recieves the Mantle, and either chooses, or is forced to Choose, her Faerie aspect. She becomes a Sidhe and is now the Summer Lady just as Aurora was before her. Lily was NOT BORN a Sidhe, but she always had the ability to BECOME one by Choosing. We don't know if The Mantle turned Lily into a Sidhe. We know that she COULD have become a Sidhe by Choosing, and that she was a Sidhe after getting the Mantle.

Nothing in that chain of events implies that were Lily an ordinary mortal who recieved the Mantle that she would have become a Sidhe.

Of course, before Cold Days nothing implied that an ordinary mortal could even recieve the Mantle.

I never said Lily was born a Sidhe. I said that before Cold Days I assumed Maeve had been born a Sidhe, but no longer (Since that is explicitly stated otherwise in Cold Days).

Please, point out where I say that Maeve (or Lily) was Born a Sidhe. You seem to be saying that they were born as ordinary humans, you seem to be saying they were born as ordinary humans, which is untrue.

[The Glyphstone]

Point of order, but Mab was trying to get Harry to take the Mantle long before Cold Days. Unless you were intentionally excluding wizards as not 'ordinary mortals'.

[BRC]

Point of order, but Mab was trying to get Harry to take the Mantle long before Cold Days. Unless you were intentionally excluding wizards as not 'ordinary mortals'.

I was intentionally excluding the Knight Mantle, since there is no chance that transforms the wearer, since the Knight is always Mortal. The Knight is not a Faerie, that is kind of the point.
The question here is the Queen Mantle (well, specifically the Lady mantle, but probably all the Queen Mantles).

[Rakaydos]

"I was human too, once." -Mab, at the end of cold days

Not changeling, human.

[lord_khaine]

Going by the gatekeeper's actions in the last book, patently false.

Nope.. You can pretend to serve 2 masters, but sooner or later you will be forced to realise you were only playing along, most likely when their interests comes at cross purpose.

Lilly was a Changeling, let's assume she had a Sidhe parent. She recieves the Mantle, and either chooses, or is forced to Choose, her Faerie aspect. She becomes a Sidhe and is now the Summer Lady just as Aurora was before her. Lily was NOT BORN a Sidhe, but she always had the ability to BECOME one by Choosing. We don't know if The Mantle turned Lily into a Sidhe. We know that she COULD have become a Sidhe by Choosing, and that she was a Sidhe after getting the Mantle.

An interesting point here, Lilly's fairy side was not sithe, but Nixie as i recall. Yet she did become a Sidhe after she became a Lady, from her apperance at least.

[BRC]

"I was human too, once." -Mab, at the end of cold days

Not changeling, human.

I thought she said "Mortal", which could be Changeling.

Although if she said Human then I guess that is proof that the Mantle transforms you. I hope Molly was not especially fond of iron things.

An interesting point here, Lilly's fairy side was not sithe, but Nixie as i recall. Yet she did become a Sidhe after she became a Lady, from her apperance at least.

We have no reason to believe that transforming from one type of fairy to another is any easier than turning from human to fairy, so I guess that is another point in the "The Mantle makes you Sidhe" column.

[Cikomyr]

I thought she said "Mortal", which could be Changeling.

Although if she said Human then I guess that is proof that the Mantle transforms you. I hope Molly was not especially fond of iron things.

We have no reason to believe that transforming from one type of fairy to another is any easier than turning from human to fairy, so I guess that is another point in the "The Mantle makes you Sidhe" column.

Her father's sword?