Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ
Roy Greenhilt

Fromper's page

FullStarFullStar Pathfinder Society GM. 4,893 posts (5,173 including aliases). 4 reviews. No lists. 1 wishlist. 16 Pathfinder Society characters.


1 to 50 of 495 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Silver Crusade

2 people marked this as a favorite.

"Magic makes sense. What she does defies the natural order." LOL

The real question is why she didn't go in first.

Silver Crusade **

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I can't say I've ever had too much gold on any character. There's always something I still want to buy.

For most of my PCs, I intentionally save up my prestige until I have the 21 for body extraction and raise dead, other than spending the first two on a cure wand.

But I decided that I'd intentionally play one particular character more recklessly, and I've been spending his prestige after every adventure. At level 4, I'm having a hard time coming up with more stuff for him to spend it on. I've used it on wands of Cure Light, Infernal Healing, Protection from Evil, oil of Daylight, potion of Fly, scrolls of various situational spells that could be useful (Comprehend Languages, Air Bubble, etc). I finally decided to save up the 5 prestige for body retrieval, since that can't be paid for in cash, and he's up to the level where he could probably afford a Raise Dead if it came up (possibly relying on other party members to chip in a little).

Silver Crusade **

1 person marked this as a favorite.

The FAQ forgets to mention that you can only do this if you rename your dead pregen to Doorknob McDeadGuy.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Here's my own method for building an effective character (which I've posted to these forums multiple times before). Bear in mind that this only refers to making a character who will be useful mechanically, and has no bearing whatsoever on the personality or back story.

1. Pick a specialty in combat.
2. Have something else you can do in combat when #1 isn't an option.
3. Pick a specialty out of combat.

Now make your character good at those 3 things. Aim for great in either #1 or #3 as your character's primary specialty. But never shoot for mega-awesome-best-in-the-world at anything, because that usually requires putting too many resources (stat points, feats, traits, money spent on equipment, etc) into one thing, and not leaving enough for the other two.

Don't try to have a 4th thing your PC can do well, because you'll spread yourself too thin. Occasionally you'll have a character build that just naturally has more things they're good at (bards and rogues tend to be good at multiple things outside of combat, for instance), so you can just go with it, but don't try too hard to be good at all of those things if they require any investment of resources.

Examples from my own PFS PCs:

Barbarian
1. Melee monster (obvious stuff like high strength, high con, Power Attack, rage powers for more melee power, etc).
2. Composite longbow and alchemist's fires
3. Diplomacy, believe it or not. I took a trait to make it a class skill, and kept it maxed out. I was rarely the main party face, but I was able to contribute in most conversations and aid another for the main face consistently.

Tattooed Fey Sorcerer
1. Enchantment spells, boosted by the bloodline's +2 bonus on compulsion spells, knowing some of those spells, and eventual Spell Focus and Greater Spell Focus.
2. Evocation, boosted by the Varisian Tattoo, and I took Magic Missile from level 1, with more damage spells later. This way, I have offense against things without minds.
3. Social skills (obvious choice for a charisma based caster).

Gnome Prankster Bard
1. Debuff things with minds using intimidation, Mock bardic performance, and debuff spells.
2. Inspire Courage, Wand of Cure Light Wounds, crossbow. Coming up with what this guy can do in battle against mindless enemies was tougher than building most of my other characters. Still picking up the occasional spell here and there that will give me something else useful to do in battle against mindless foes.
3. Skill monkey, especially on face skills and bardic knowledge, but also has others.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.

It's actually much better now than it was earlier in the day.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Is it just me, or has all of Paizo.com been extra slow today? I'm not noticing this problem on other web sites, so it doesn't seem to be my internet connection.

Silver Crusade **

2 people marked this as a favorite.

*pulls out the rolled up newspaper*

BAD NOSIG!!! BAD!!!

Silver Crusade **

30 people marked this as FAQ candidate. 1 person marked this as a favorite.

This has been asked several times before, and nobody at Paizo has responded.

Quick summary: Fighter weapon groups have been defined in multiple books. Each time, they give a "complete" list of all weapons that fall into each group. Notes in Ultimate Combat and Ultimate Equipment have said something like:

Ultimate Equipment wrote:
For the purpose of the fighter class's weapon training ability, weapon groups are defined as follows (GMs may add other weapons to these groups, or add entirely new groups).

But there are plenty of PFS legal weapons that aren't mentioned at all in these lists, such as the new weapons introduced in the Advanced Race Guide. Common sense would dictate that the dwarven longhammer from the Advanced Race Guide would fall into the hammer group, and any home group GM who doesn't allow it is violating Wheaton's Law, but we all know that PFS runs on pure RAW, not common sense.

So here are the questions, as specific as I can make them:

1. In Pathfinder Society, are all legal, non-improvised weapons assumed to be part of at least one weapon group?

2. If the answer is that they're always in a group, can we assume that the obvious, common sense answers can be used to add them to groups? (ie Anything with "axe" in its name is in the axe group, anything with "hammer" in its name is in the hammer group, anything with reach is in the polearm group, any weapon that's worn instead of wielded in a hand is in the close group, etc)

And before anyone says this is a rules question, not a PFS question, that's why I included the quote from Ultimate Equipment, above. Paizo has already published their official answer to the general rules question. I don't expect them to ever clarify that further than the quote above. It doesn't help PFS. That's why this is a PFS specific question.

Silver Crusade **

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Carpe DM! Seize the Dungeon Master!

Silver Crusade **

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Tempest_Knight wrote:
I really wish they would reprint a few of the older maps.

Unfortunately, Paizo has a strict corporate policy against reprinting anything other than core hardbook books (stuff that's on the PRD). They've also got a strict corporate policy against questioning any of their 10+ year old policies, to see if they still make sense. I'm assuming the people behind both of these policies have pointy hair and look like Dilbert's boss.

Silver Crusade

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Definitely identifying a weakness in the vamp, but I don't know how that would qualify as a plan. It'll definitely come up later, though.

Silver Crusade **

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Another time saving tip for GMs: Tell the players not to do any math unless you ask for it.

I've seen lots of people sit there and spend 30-60 seconds adding up their attack bonus, temporary buffs, flank bonus, etc every single turn before they roll the d20 to see if they hit. Half the time, they roll so low or so high that it just doesn't matter. Have them roll, and if it's really obvious that they'll hit/miss based on the die, then the details of the math become irrelevant.

Silver Crusade **

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Woran wrote:
I have always seen him as a coward that refuses to be held accountable for his own mistakes.

That's definitely how the writing of this scenario portrays him. It also portrays Drandle Dreng as over-estimating Nigel.

So I was doing last minute prep to run this tonight, and I had a question I wanted to post here, but now I can't remember it. Expect me to be back in this thread in the next couple of hours.

Silver Crusade **

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Start by downloading the free Guide to Organized Play and reading that. It'll tell you what you need to know to build a character - point buy, legal races, starting gold, etc.

Silver Crusade **

1 person marked this as a favorite.

"Mobs" predates both "toon" and MMOs. The term comes from MUDs (Multi-User Dungeons or Domains) - text based internet RPGs of the late 80s and 90s, which were the text based predecessors of MMOs. On the object oriented programming side of things, everything in a MUD was an "object", and monsters/NPCs were generally the only objects that could move by themselves, so they were considered "mobile objects", or "mobs" for short. I saw that term in use as early as 92, but it could be even older than that.

Silver Crusade **

1 person marked this as a favorite.

So... eidolons are only good at tanking starting at level 2, not 1, and it's ALWAYS been that way in every version, not just PFS, and that's your definition of a nerf???

Given all the complaints about summoners being overpowered, I'll just say, "Yes, they're still viable", and leave it at that.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ed Reppert wrote:
Ross Byers wrote:
the customer doesn't pay your mistakes" is like "the customer is always right": a blatant falsehood that ignores how running a business actually works in exchange for creating a sense of entitlement.
The customer is always right - except when he's wrong. :-)

Not Always Right

Silver Crusade **

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Undone wrote:
I'm worried about the first and last encounter. They seem extremely likely to TPK. I'm unsure what can reasonably be done to not kill the PC's. Outside of hardcore power gamers it seems likely to TPK in the first and last encounters.

The first fight definitely shouldn't TPK. The robots are trying to kick out intruders. If the PCs leave the building, the robots shouldn't pursue. That makes running away a very easy option.

When I played it, my sorcerer didn't even enter the building until that fight was over - I spent the whole time casting from just outside the doors. The robots are smart enough that they would have targeted me if I'd kept at it after my teammates went down inside the room, but that never happened, because my teammates were always in the room drawing their fire.

Silver Crusade **

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Coming in late. My personal code of conduct actually forbids me from participating in threads with the word "paladin" in the title, but I failed my Will save, so I fell.

Jiggy wrote:
Hangman Henry IX wrote:
i keep seeing people say that bad players have used paladins as a crutch for bad things, and that it isn't the classes fault, but i don't see a game mechanics difference between this argument and the argument against evil characters.
The difference is that with paladins, you have to either be wrong about how the class works or be intentionally disruptive in order for it to be a problem; whereas with evil PCs, the simple act of playing a genuinely evil PC (or similar banned options) can cause issues all on its own.

The entire thread in a nutshell, right there in the bolded text. That sums up every single paladin code debate in the history of the game, going back to 1st edition AD&D.

Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:
Your argument seems to be (and I'm sure you'll correct me) that you don't like good characters, but you're okay with them if they can be browbeaten into giving up their convictions. However the paladins are harder to browbeat because there are actual in game repercussions for them betraying their character concept.

I'm still waiting for Hangman Henry to correct him, because this really does seem to be true to me. If it isn't, then Henry needs to speak up.

I have a lawful good cleric of Sarenrae who other players don't like me playing sometimes, because I won't let people kill prisoners or turn down a surrender offer from enemies. Sarenrae is the goddess of redemption, so I'll always let enemies have a chance to be redeemed. My first paladin character, on the other hand, is an Oath of Vengence "smite them all" type who figures that anyone who starts a fight against the good guys has already made their choice and doesn't deserve redemption, so I don't stabilize fallen foes or prevent my allies from killing them with that paladin. My second paladin is kindler and gentler than that, so more like the cleric.

Hangman Henry IX wrote:
yeh i guess it just seems to me that there are players who will use the threat of loss of class mechanics in order to browbeat other players. i don't think it is good to put tools like that in players' hands.

Those tools aren't in the players' hands. Anyone who thinks they are is in the "wrong about how the class works" category. A paladin doesn't fall if they work with someone who violates their code. The Core Rulebook even explicitly states that they can work with evil for the greater good. So why wouldn't they be allowed to work with my chaotic good prankster bard gnome (in the Silver Crusade!) who lies a lot? Or a cleric of Asmodeus, as in the group I GMed on Monday, where the Asmodean hated the devout Cayden Cailean worshiper more than he hated the group's paladin. At least the paladin is lawful.

And yes, the Pathfinder Society can be seen as the greater good. It's a neutral organization technically, but leaning towards good. Many good people, including paladins, intentionally join just to help aim the organization towards doing more good. That's the entire mission of the Silver Crusade, after all. So even if you're just on a truly neutral "go retrieve this artifact" mission, succeeding in the mission is ALWAYS considered to be "for the greater good", and allows a paladin to work with less honorable people to do so.

Plus, there's the fact that paladins take oaths pretty seriously, and every paladin in the Society presumably swore to "Explore, Report, Cooperate", so they need to obey that "cooperate" party.

Hangman Henry IX wrote:
My issue with the standard paladin code is that it is the one that most frequently comes into conflict with the missions given to pathfinder agents. They are sent in missions where if they do what they are told they break their code (by lying)

I have never seen a PFS mission where every member of the team is required to lie. There are quite a few where you're told not to let anyone know you're Pathfinders. There are one or two where one member of the group has to lie, while the others stand around watching it happen. But the paladin is never specifically ordered to lie. Once again, they're allowed to work with others who don't follow the same code as themselves, as long as it's for the greater good.

I've actually played with paladins at the table in 3 of the scenarios you mentioned earlier where you thought they'd cause problems, and there were never any issues. And for the record, my favorite answer to the "Are you a Pathfinder?" question, when you're supposed to be undercover, is "He does the talking, I'm just the muscle", and point to the bard with the maxed out bluff skill.

TL;DR: It's not that people are trying to water down or ignore the paladin's code, as you say in many of your posts. It's that the code isn't nearly as restrictive as you seem to think it is, and never was.

Silver Crusade **

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Also, check out this web site.

Silver Crusade

4 people marked this as a favorite.

Durkula is using puns - he really is pure evil!!!

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Puna'chong wrote:
The pits made by the spells are dimensional space. You don't make an actual pit in the ground, so you can't use it for excavating or landscape decoration.

No, but with creative placement, you can still use it to bypass doors or walls. Have the pit go under the door, so you can climb down the pit on one side of the door, and climb out of the pit on the other.

Silver Crusade **

1 person marked this as a favorite.
wakedown wrote:
David_Bross wrote:
I GMed first steps the other day for 3 barbarians and 2 level 1 pregens who were new players to PFS. The barbarians made the rest of the table somewhat moot...

How many GMs are seeing a lot of PCs making level 1 barbarians that suddenly morph into something completely different upon reaching level 2? As some form of "my concept isn't good at level 1, so this Barbarian with 2d6+13 Power Attack and 26hp Tribal Scars is what I'm playing until I start my 4th scenario?"

And the same barbarian is then used again by the same player for their next ##,###-? before it morphs again into the "real desired PC". I think I've seen at least 5-6 people do this in the past 6 months now. Technically, they can do this, even if it gets a frown from the GM/coordinator. And, it's very true if 2 or more people are doing this in the same scenario, it really throws off the experience of the subtier 1-2 scenario for everyone involved (by marginalizing their respective contributions).

Now where's that level 4 bard BBEG with a scroll of Dominate when you need them?

Hasn't anyone told these people that skipping 1st level is what GM credit is for?

Silver Crusade **

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'd say the holy symbols of the major deities should be common knowledge enough for anyone to try untrained, so there's a chance she'd recognize Asmodeus's symbol.

I agree that you overreacted, but at least you didn't kill them, and it sounds like the group had fun, so it's ok.

Silver Crusade **

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Nefreet wrote:
Also, up until now, Knowledge (Arcana) was the skill needed to identify the abilities and weaknesses of Constructs. As per the Technology Guide, Knowledge (Engineering) is now the skill you need to identify Constructs with the Robot subtype (though you do not need the Technologist feat to do so).

Just make sure that the construct in question actually has the robot subtype. Just to confuse things even more, there's one construct in a season 6 adventure that's clearly technological, but it still uses Knowledge (Arcana), because its subtype isn't robot. It makes no sense whatsoever, but that ruling has been confirmed by John Compton.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I think it should Drandle Dreng as Uncle Sam instead.

Silver Crusade **

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Chris Mortika wrote:

DM Beckett, how do you adjudicate magus NPCs in scenarios?

The Magus class is in the APG and the PRD, neither of which is part of the Core assumption. Rules for magus characters aren't spelled out in the PFS Guide nor the individual scenarios.

The individual scenarios ALWAYS say "See Ultimate Magic" when there's a magus NPC involved. And if there's an oracle NPC, they ALWAYS say "See Advanced Players Guide". There's usually a page number given. Heck, every single monster specifically says which Bestiary to look it up in. That's just the way PFS scenarios are written.

Just this weekend, I've been prepping a scenario to run tomorrow where some of the NPCs have a prestige class from Inner Sea World Guide (Red Mantis Assassin). Not only does the adventure list the page number from ISWG, it also gives the relevant rules in the stat blocks of those NPCs for those GMs who don't own that book.

If there's a scenario that wants the GM to use non-Core assumption rules, the scenario WILL say so. Otherwise, the GM has no reason to know that there's something they should be looking up.

The new Guide to Organized Play gives some basic rules for tech items for season 6. It doesn't talk about the DC of identifying tech items or robots. Thus, if the rules aren't the same as identifying any other construct (knowledge: arcana with a DC of 15 + CR, since they're such rare "creatures"), then the scenario needs to explicitly say so.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Rhapsodic College Dropout wrote:
I use Grease on giants to great effect. Target their massive weapons, and its a Reflex save every round until it drops and it stays coated for quite awhile. Use Heightened Grease if you really want to make it stick.

This is incorrect. This is actually a very common misconception about Grease, but I just recently learned that I've been playing it wrong all along.

If Grease is cast on an attended item, and the creature holding that item makes the initial saving throw, then the item doesn't get greased. Thus, there are no subsequent saving throws to see if they drop the item each round after the first.

Here's the FAQ about this.

That said, Grease is still a decent option against giants, just not quite as powerful as RCD thought.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
claudekennilol wrote:
Zhayne wrote:
claudekennilol wrote:
chaoseffect wrote:
blahpers wrote:
In other words, just because you believe the paladin's Code to be flawed does not mean that a paladin need not follow it.
Yes, a Paladin does RAW have to follow it. That doesn't stop it from being stupid, poorly done, or/and arbitrary in places.

RAW: lie: an intentionally false statement

None of my examples above of what a bluff could be are intentionally false.

"What's new, Mr. Paladin?"

"Well, back is out of joint, my genitals itch, I'm getting a minor headache, had diarrhea last night ..."
"Whoa, TMI!"
"Sorry, but if I don't tell you everything, I lose my powers."

rofl.

But you do bring up a good point, if a "lie by omission" is in fact a lie, then where you do draw the line?

You draw the line at the point that it's intentionally deceitful.

Silver Crusade **

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Ok, I didn't realize you were talking about druid specific domains from Ultimate Magic.

Nefreet's post covers it. Clerics and inquisitors in PFS must have a legal deity, and choose their domains from those offered by the deity, and none of the deities offer those druid domains. So this doesn't work in PFS.

Silver Crusade

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Does the bride have an identical twin sister?

Silver Crusade

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Paladins aren't about technicalities. They're about doing what's right at all times.

Being honorable includes being honest. That doesn't just mean technically avoid lies. It also means not being deceitful with truthful words.

Of course, they don't necessarily have to answer every question. In Anguish's example of a beasty looking for a little kid to eat, the paladin's answer should be "Be gone, evil fiend! Look elsewhere for your meal, unless you plan to attack me!"

Silver Crusade **

1 person marked this as a favorite.
FiddlersGreen wrote:

Laser pistols and blasters have been a part of the fantasy genre since the Might and Magic rpg series. Get with the program, you nay-sayers! XD

Hopefully I'm not the only person around here old enough to remember that series!

Disclaimer: this comment is meant to be taken light-heartedly.

Umm, no. I don't know this Might and Magic stuff, because I've never been much of a video gamer, but I just googled it, and I played AD&D 1st edition with lasers and robots before that video game. Deusvalt already provided the link, above.

Silver Crusade **

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Mistwalker wrote:

I too will chime in that it isn't the age of the player, but the maturity.

And there isn't an age limit on playing or GMing in PFS.

Adding a "me too" here.

I once GMed a 9 year old girl at a convention. She was a bit overly bloodthirsty, apparently wanting more of a hack and slash game, but a lot of adults are the same way. Overall, it was fun having her at the table.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Jane "The Knife" wrote:

two rogues fighting an animated chair...

1st rogue: "hay, can you get sneak dice on an animated object?'
2nd rogue: "only if you stab it in the back!"

Been there, done that. GMed a couple playing sibling rogues through an adventure that actually had an animated chair, so they flanked it together. The back stab puns ran wild.

Of course, this also reminds me of Gamers: Dorkness Rising: "You can't backstab a book!" "It's got a spine, doesn't it?"

Silver Crusade **

1 person marked this as a favorite.

This year's seasonal "theme" is on the nation of Numeria, which includes a crashed spaceship known as the Silver Mount. Two of the new scenarios that debuted at GenCon tied into this directly, and one of those has a laser on the chronicle sheet with very limited ammo.

My level 7 sorcerer thinks physical weapons are beneath him, (but so are direct damage spells), but as a gnome, he's too curious about this "technic stuff" not to try it. I might buy the laser for him, as the first weapon he's ever owned. If I do, when I pull it out while playing, I would definitely describe it without mentioning it's name. But then, I'm also likely to waste the ammo on things like starting campfires instead of using it against enemies.

Silver Crusade **

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Chris Mortika wrote:

Regarding magic re-roll shirts, my table policy is pretty simple: if you want a re-roll, you have to be wearing the shirt, as a shirt*, when the original roll happens. (If you just have the shirt handy, you should don it, and I can give you the re-roll onrolls you make from that point on.) For the folio, have it on the table.

Straight-forward, and abides by the language of the Guide.

* exceptions for the extreme heavy-set, for whom even the largest t-shirts are insufficient.

My problem with this is multi-day conventions. If someone bought one shirt and hoped to use it every time they play PFS, you're saying they have to wear the same shirt multiple days in a row. That's a problem.

I can see not allowing someone to just pull the shirt out of a bag when they need the re-roll. But if someone prominently displays the shirt without actually wearing it (draped over the back of their chair, or their backpack next to the table, etc), I think that should always be enough.

Silver Crusade

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I have a friend who wore her "Chaotic Neutral: The real evil" t-shirt at GenCon this weekend.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Tacticslion wrote:

It didn't "do" anything except get stabbed into Durkula.

It's a gag: he's not sure about it ("it'll take some getting used to"), then tests it on Durkula, succeeds in stabbing him, gets mind-controlled off the side, annoys Roy, and returns (notice his walking feet in the last panel) with "It's fine, thanks." indicating he's satisfied with it.

EDIT: Ninja'd by Ross, but since I came to a different conclusion, I'm leaving mine up. :)

Ok, I think you're right. The dagger didn't do anything. I think Belkar did actually stab Durkon, go overboard, and get hauled back in by Roy. The suddenness of it just seemed like a pyschic flash or something, but looking at the last panel, he's walking back in on V, who is sitting in a different position than when s/he gave B the knife (and the cat is done eating).

Silver Crusade **

1 person marked this as a favorite.

From the blog post introducing the change:

Quote:
Beginning on August 14th, creating an aasimar or tiefling character will require a special Chronicle sheet

I'd say the "beginning on" wording is pretty clear - August 13 is the actual deadline to play a grandfathered outsider without a boon.

It should be noted that the same wording was used for not needing a boon for kitsune, wayang, and nagaji PCs, which makes sense, since they want people to be able to start playing them tomorrow at GenCon.

So... what time zone are you in? It's still August 13 somewhere, right? :P

Silver Crusade

4 people marked this as a favorite.

Out of curiosity, I went back and found where Tarquin lost his dagger.

Silver Crusade **

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'd say Core Rulebook and Advanced Players Guide are the core books that define the game, and everyone should have them.

Beyond that, it greatly depends on what type of PC you're playing. Ultimate Equipment, Advanced Race Guide, Inner Sea Magic, and Seeker of Secrets would probably be the next on my list.

Silver Crusade **

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Jiggy wrote:
Never trust some schmuck named Jiggy on the internet. ;)

QFT

:P

Silver Crusade **

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Hmm, I can see the new retirement story arc now:

6-21: Don't Worry, We're Pathfinders, part 1: Explore
6-22: Don't Worry, We're Pathfinders, part 2: Report
6-23: Don't Worry, We're Pathfinders, part 3: Cooperate

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I actually considered it for a single class paladin, since their caster level is their paladin level -3. That would help with things like Divine Favor increasing its bonuses earlier.

Silver Crusade **

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Kobold Cleaver wrote:
The fact is, yes, morality is absolute.

You know, I really want to just walk away and not start a philosophy debate that could easily go on for thousands of posts (and thousands of years!), but I just can't let this one go.

No, morality is not absolute. Different societies have different values, and morality changes over time. The only absolute in the universe is change.

Sniggevert wrote:

Eating sentient humanoids is what is called out, as it would be considered cannibalism.

I truly am boggled by the number of posters that can't seem to understand why something like that might be considered anti-social, repugnant, or evil in society.

But eating a dragon that has higher intelligence and wisdom than most PCs is acceptable, because the creature's not a biped? No, I honestly don't understand why eating a humanoid is considered more taboo than eating other sentient creatures.

And again, I've been trying to avoid crossing the line into real world ethical debates, but as long as I've crossed it already, I may as well throw this out there too. Even in the real world, I don't consider cannibalism evil. Killing is clearly evil, and not respecting a person or their family's wishes for what to do with their body once they die is disrespectful. But if there were a society whose funeral practices involved eating the remains of the dead, you'd call it evil? Why? It might be unsafe, and many of us would consider it gross, but I don't see it as evil. It's a cultural taboo, not an absolute moral standard.

I'm a vegetarian in the real world because I refuse to kill (or pay others to kill) innocent animals that have enough sentience to want to live, feel pain and fear, and have any sort of emotions or personality. And I've had enough pets in my life to know that even birdbrains like chickens have unique personalities and emotions. In game terms, I disagree with killing anything with an intelligence score, even if that int score is only 1 or 2. But once an animal's already dead, it doesn't matter to me what happens to their body. The act of eating them isn't what I consider morally wrong - it's the act of killing them that I have a problem with.

Silver Crusade **

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Bigdaddyjug wrote:
I was shocked tonight when I sat down at the table with my tiefling inquisitor of Szuriel and nobody gave me a funny look at all.

And this is why tieflings are being removed.

Silver Crusade **

1 person marked this as a favorite.
kinevon wrote:
Fromper wrote:
Yeah, the Trade Prince has always struck me as the most boring faction head, too.

Who? Isn't the Qadira faction leader Pasha Muhlia Al-Jakri?

** spoiler omitted **

From what I saw, Pasha was interesting in exactly one scenario - her last one.

Silver Crusade **

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Imbicatus wrote:
Fromper wrote:

"Should you or any of your team be caught or killed, the Society will disavow any knowledge of your actions. This Venture-Captain will self-destruct in five seconds."

Idea for a Scenario: A mad alchemist implants bombs in all the VCs.

Every time I GM The Disappeared, I want to play the Mission Impossible theme song and use this line.

Silver Crusade **

3 people marked this as a favorite.

"Should you or any of your team be caught or killed, the Society will disavow any knowledge of your actions. This Venture-Captain will self-destruct in five seconds."

Victor Zajic wrote:
noswald wrote:
There are quite a few scenarios where identifying yourself as a Pathfinder makes things worse. I've had tables where "IN THE VC BRIEFING" they specifically say to hide your affiliation with the Pathfinder Society, that immediately start using their Society resources at the first sign of trouble. It makes for some interesting scenarios.
I did that once, but that character takes his paladinhood fairly seriously.

Just because paladins can't lie, it doesn't mean they have to volunteer information.

1 to 50 of 495 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.