Zauron13's page

Wraithguard wrote:

Theme: Icon

Class: Mechanic - Drone

Yeah, I saw the Mechanic, but the thing is - what if you're not a mechanic? For example, you might be am ambassador, who just happens to know how to tinker with store-bought drone kits. Also, of course, what if you want a handful of drones?

For example, in Shadowrun, I had a private investigator - he used magic, but he had a few drones on hand and AR contacts to see what they could see. They were smart enough to get the job done, but he could pilot them remotely.

I was thinking of something along those lines. Go to the tech shop, get a few drones, download a few programs, install some basic AI, connect them wireless to a headset, and away I go.

The private eye concept would most likely, at least for now, be covered by being a multi-class Mystic/Technomancer Mechanic.

Basically, a lot of options for more specific things (like owner of your own drone that isn't like the Mechanic) are either "Up to the GM" or possible content for a future book.

Social Hob-Knobs would be the Icon theme as Wraithguard covered, most likely. You even get to theme it a bit. Maybe a famous actor, vidgame player, and so on.

Was there anything specific that felt off about the Envoy? We might be able to find something that works for the concept other than just the Theme if you have more details.

evilnerf wrote:

Tarik Blackhands wrote:

I guess to me the whole hypothetical "Making a Male Lashunta Envoy is mechanically unsound" falls under the same reasoning as "Making a Dwarf Oracle is mechanically unsound" and if anyone was deadset on making one of those for whatever reason something would have to give whether it be class or race/gender (or just taking the suboptimal option).

Okay, so say they had kept things the same, right? Say I want to make a Sorcerer, and I don't like playing female characters. There are many reasons why this could be, including but not limited to: Me wanting to play a character I identify with, my table not being comfortable with me gender-bending, me not feeling confident that I can play a female character in a respectful manner.

So I'm making an engineer. There is basically a whole race that is basically off limits to me for the sole reason that I am a male and want to play a male character. That sucks!

Like I said, I don't see that as any different than the whole dwarf oracle thing or the guy who wants to play a Vesk Mechanic because he really likes Trandoshans from Star Wars and is a bit of gearhead irl but finds the whole race off limits because Vesk take -int or something (Again, don't have the books, so feel free to substitute the proper race/class that don't work). Sucks, but that's the way the news goes the way the game is designed.

I think the main difference is all of us are humans (not Vesk, Shirren, etc.), and we all understand the concept of gender. We all have some form of gender. We might not fully relate to Shirren, Orc, or Dwarf, so it isn't as disheartening to be told "dwarves make bad oracles, don't play them". But we can much more fully relate to the concept of male, female, and other gender concepts. Being told "Your character can't be a good oracle because they are a woman" feels a lot worse than "You can't be a good oracle as a Shirren". One I can directly relate to, whereas I can only theoretically relate to the Shirren.

I have an Order of the Cockatrice Samurai. I play up the Glory-hound aspect of it (hopefully comically), claiming to be the best swordsman, claiming opponents died out of fear of my great tales (instead of my allies swords and spells, which I congratulate out of character), Challenging the most intimidating looking opponent, and so on. I even bought the Herald Vanity to make sure everyone knows who I am, possibly in a Pro-Wrestling announcer voice.

Still cooperates and shares the wealth, just always gets an equal share of anything.

My current plan is an Shirren Mystic, who is a gambler. One of their quirks when playing space poker is talking to their larval daughter. Lots of ideas on the mind games one can play, especially when you actually are telepathic. Can even try to freak out other players with the natural insect voice.

I wouldn't be surprised if more "option/choice" based gambling existed on Shirren worlds, if they gamble at all. Like slot machines with different rules based on the options chosen, that kind of thing. Lots of world building potential for this character as well.

Weapon Finesse is not needed, as operative weapons are automatically allowed to use Dex to hit instead of STR for any PC, not just operatives.

Is the issue that not all light type weapons are covered, and only certain operative ones? That could be rectified with just future weapons that fit more of a theme (mono-whips, rapier lasers, etc.) being marked with the operative quality.

103: A shirren Icon (not sure on class yet), whose fame comes from posting cute pics of them with their child (still a larvae in a tube), (think Instagramming baby pics), "tweeting" humorous "dad" jokes, and so on. Mainly because the whole "Space Dad!" part of Keskodai is so cute to me for some reason.

EltonJ wrote:

No doubt about it, they did sell out at GenCon that Thursday. I had to pick up my copy via download. And downloading it was laboriously slow, but I eventually got my copy. I have it backed up on my memory stick.

Based on how much they sold, yeah. Be prepared for more.

The final turn out numbers for gencon 50 were were over 200k unique attendees. I think they printed more than they felt they would need but with such epic turn out and being one of the hot con items to buy I don't think they could have afforded to print as many as would have gotten purchased. Printing books costs cash so there is the problem of you need the money flow to prime the pump enough to sell them. They had a ton of pathfinder stuff there but the demand was just incredible.

Not quite that many at Gen Con, but yeah, good job on selling out of almost everything Starfinder related! I got to play a session on Sunday, and I really enjoyed it. The perfect blend of simplified sci-fi and Pathfinder for me (as someone who plays a lot of Pathfinder).

For those interested in Gen Con numbers, 207,979 Turnstile attendees (4% increase), with about 60,000 unique attendees (sold out before the show this time)

You might want to check out the Wall of Names facebook group, they'll have a few for you. They even have a description of how they fell most of the time.

Wall of Names Facebook

I like these, especially the "ranks" of ships to get a sense of how powerful the Starfinders were.

My only hope is to get a "Murder on the Throaty Mermaid" type scenario. That ship is still my goto for any naval adventure in PFS.

I would presume, much like Pathfinder Society, that you can play any scenario with the pregens. Just like I can play PFS's "The Confirmation" with the Iconic pregens (and am generally fine without the core book for the first few sessions), it would make sense for SFS to follow the same rules, letting you play as the iconics for the sessions.

Of course, I'm just spit balling.

Hello! I'm thinking you'd want to put questions like these in the general section of the Pathfinder Society forums, instead of the scenario submission section.

To answer about gunsmithing, I'd have to look for the links, but the understanding I have is that, not only do gunslingers not really "craft", but instead have a discount as if they have crafted their ammo. Also, they can't fully make guns, only upgrade their starting gun to masterwork. They can't make pepper boxes to sell, etc.

Even if they could make things in such a way, I would assume, even with a lack of stated rules, that it would follow alchemists so they cannot sell for a profit.

I would guess it's less "Evil gods" and more "Limit Lovecraft/horror stuff in our organized campaign out of respect for Chaosium and Call of Cthulhu." Or the domains might be deemed too good? Not sure.

A sorcerer and/or a bard should be doing fine in PFS. They both can contribute well in combat, as long as they aren't the only ones there (and a sorcerer can be real good, as they are full casters). Plus, they can handle social situations when they come up, have versatility, and more!

Is there any scenario in particular, or a season that you've been having difficulty having fun with? Many scenarios try to balance social situations with combat, some more so than others, so it may be just a selection thing.

The fact that this applies to ALL alignment based spells is the thing that balances it. People focus on Evil, but it applies to Law, Chaos and Good as well. With that in mind, and having to track on a session by session basis, no hold overs, I'd be totally fine with the rule being used.

While it might be balanced... thematically? I guess? Not sure what I'm looking for there...

It's not balanced PFS wise. If I'm marked Lawful, i get a stick up my rear (joking) and maybe less effectiveness if my god hates me now.

If I'm marked Evil I'm marked dead. I'm gone unless i can afford the atonement.

Although I'm interested, I fear dividing the Player base between Starfinder Corps (I like that name!) and PFS. I'm at a con, I have to decide between the two, between conflicting specials, etc.

It won't completely split the player base, but that's my concern. I'm still really looking forward to Starfinder, and whatever Paizo does to promote it.

The real question for me is: How different will Starfinder be from SpellJammer? I never had the chance to play it, but I like the concept.

Thanks again Painlord (and everyone else blogging) for telling us the scoop on all the Paizo goodness we miss!

Yeah, other than the specials, most events are gone after the first week. But keep checking back, plans change.

If you can't get regular tickets, feel free to try generics. Regular events and morning slots tend to have spaces open as people sleep in and miss events.

I'm not sure about AL, but I am noticing some decline in PFS tables around Grand Rapids, MI. Most of the posts on our site are an hour or two away from there, a bit out of the way for me.

I even tried starting some about a half hour away, but it's small going so far. It might just be a miscommunication about where we advertise events too.

Back when I was more active a few years ago, there were more game stores welcoming us, but it's hard to welcome tables that bring in $30, maybe, when you get Magic Players that bring in $60.

Not sure about the rest of Michigan, but they seem to be doing well.

None of mine link at the moment, but I have a few ideas for future characters.

My CORE Gnome Paladin of Shelyn (random race/class combo) also rolled having a twin for the random background generation, so I might make a gnome cleric of Zon-Kuthon to be the sibling. If I figure out how to make a negative energy cleric be useful, that is.

My other idea is to have my CORE Half-orc Sorcerer, played as a deposed noble of Galt, be the Social Identity of a Vigilante character in Classic. That way, almost none of the characters one of them adventures with adventure with the other, so it feels like a true Bruce Wayne/Batman thing.

I'm Hiding In Your Closet wrote:

Nimrandir wrote:

See, I was thinking a 5-foot enhancement bonus to your land speed, but only when moving in a line.

There. That's the qualifier to keep that option from being overpowered that I was looking for!

Or only when running or charging might be another one

While also insulting the badniks by telling them that they are, in fact, too slow.

The forum is a fickle mistress.

---

I agree with Ferious Thune. "Don't harm without consent" is a nice clear principle.

I've been at odds with my GM when he claimed that using a single magic missile to wake up my Fascinated L3 PC would constitute illegal PVP, while I actually wanted it to happen to me.

To be fair, your PC couldn't say it was ok. Probably one of those odd corner cases where OC and IC can't properly match up in terms of tactics. (Although, as A DM, it is the equivalent of letting some one lightly hit you to wake you from sleep. I'd allow it).

That is all though. I don't really want to muddle this thread more.

I would be very happy to buy an "Ultimate Society" or whatever it would be called. It would be very convenient, and I already have most of those PFS books on PDF.

Huh. I wonder why it is somewhat common in fantasy settings to give atheists/no specific diety (in fantasy game terms) a really, really bum deal. The wall of Souls in Forgotten Realms, fed to Groetus, etc.

I've had GMs make me fill out the sheet in full before they sign it.

I decided to buy all of my stuff on the next chronicle, after I looked up what I wanted.

I thought it was one of those rules never fully followed, or am interpretation of the Chronicle rules, but I'm not sure if I recall the exact wording even. Huh.

For other possible ideas, I would recommend checking out the Totemic Skald archetype in the ACG. That grants you a rage power based on a Hunter Focus, which is nice to allow for different ability score modification. It still won't help the wizard, but your rage can then add Dex, Str, and Con, so every type of martial will benefit.

Finlanderboy wrote:

sczarni was one of my favorite factions. These were the morally lacking pathfinders with special skills. I honestly felt people outside of the game bemoaned that pathfinders needed to remove the criminal aspect of it's group(anyhow they largely are criminals in many areas and do criminal activity consistently).

Removing these factions I feel was the wrong move. Maybe it was too difficult to write all these interesting lines for this game would have been a decent reason, but I see the factions get less and less attention anyway. That is also a shame. As this was am obvious improvement added to the org play genre. Poor implementation of a great idea by putting the work in poor hands is not the fault of the idea.

Ooo boy you're going to be really happy to find out that the Sczarni are still technically a faction with the Exchange. Hell they even show up in the season 7 metaplot.

The Exchange is not the Sczarni. Not even close. I stayed with them out of character loyalty, but they are much, much, much more like a Quadiran Merchant League instead of the shady crime family.

The faction cards have almost nothing of Sczarni in them. It is all merchants, licenses, trading, and some peaceful negotiation (which could be bribery or trickery, the only crime).

Other than scenarios giving us some influence as to how to do things if you are part of the faction (smuggle or legit), there is hardly anything in the day-to-day operations of an Exchange agent that implies the Sczarni are even a part of it. I had hoped for more Guaril influence after playing "The Paths We Choose", but for shady dealings, Sovereign Court is much better.

Hopefully, it's better in the season 7 scenarios.

Sorry for derail, OP!

I might like like this in a home game. Just maybe. Not in PFS generally.

I try not to use my HP numbers all the time and be more relative, like Bloodied as Finlander said. Instead of being down 5 points, I'll request another zap of a wand, etc. But when the chips are down and the cleric needs to know if a channel is needed, I'll use the numbers if my description doesn't cut it.

The CLW thing is just an unspoken convention, but not a rule, that you help provide your own healing.

Basically, healing in combat is generally a taticly poor choice. Clerics/Druids/Other 9 classes that can use CLW wands are better served with buffs, offensive spells, and so forth.

By providing your own wand for others to cast on you, they don't need to spend either spell slots better used elsewhere, or their own expendable resources. It's mostly a nice thing to do. I never expect players to know about it until level 2. Then I think you should have one, but I'll still heal you anyway.

Pfs legal is real tough. All of the "drow" heritage type traits and alternate racial abilities aren't allowed, simply because Drow are rare and "Always Evil" in Golarion.

But if you go with the Mwangi Elves, known as Ekujae, that's legal as far as I know. It's just fluff.

I'd look them up on the Pathfinder wiki(s) to see if you like the physical description and culture, but it might just do. They revere nature and are tribal. The only thing from the generator missing is the Tech focus, and the desert town.

I'm not sure what traits would be good, but anything with a jungle theme, or some of the Wild/Savage Elf template from the Advanced Race Guide might work.

For story elements, it never hurts to have a reason to be part of the Pathfinder society, if that's what you are going for in this campaign/PFS. Maybe the friend was killed by the Aspis Consortium, the rival of the Society.

One final note: If you play in PFS, welcome! Make sure to read the guide to Organized Play, and know that you need to own the books you use to be "legal". While it is up to individual GMs to decide how often to enforce that, it's better safe than sorry.

You'll want to post in the general advice forum. I've flagged the thread to be moved (although someone else can do so as well).

You can do a 2 weapon Dex-Build Paladin somewhat easily. You can smite with both daggers, etc. You might want to take 3 levels of Unchained Rogue to add your Dex to damage.

A warpriest might be fun, since you get more healer/buff than a Paladin and less pure damage. You could even make your daggers hit for more than 1d4 that way.

Here's an idea: 3 Unchained Rogue / X Warpriest. Get 3 levels of Unchained Rogue (Maybe 5 if you want skill unlock) to get Sneak Attack, Weapon Finesse, Dex to Damage, and skills. Then, you can be a Warpriest for the buff and healing. Take Magical Knack to cover up the reduced caster level.

The only thing not quite PFS is the Dark Elf thing. There are elves in the Mwangi that have dark skin, but if we are talking Drow Dark Elf, there is no way to play one in PFS.

What I like to do (if taking the player aside didn't help and all), is have the official ending happen. You won, yay, etc. But, if we have time, I offer to run the encounter again, no penalty, just to see how it could have went if the Big Bad made that save, or won initiative, or the other reasons some well-meaning GMS "fudge" die rolls to increase challenge. This way, you get about 75% of the fun, without going too far.

Be a Tengu with the various gliding/wings traits? It's the cheapest in cost, but then you have to be a Tengu. Which isn't good or bad, just is.

I'd say it isn't reliable enough to take it because a wizard offers it. Glider is your best bet probably.

I'd like more stories with decisions that impact the factions direction. I know some scenarios had that, but I'm not sure if it resulted in anything. All I know is my Sczarni "ronin" is not happy with the Exchange, but he'll stick with it.

Some impact of my actions on the faction storyline would be nice.

That is true, you can't have rules for every action, but things that are plausible generally have some tangentially related rule to go off of.

For example, knocking that tree over would be some strength check, or breaking hardness 10 on probably, I don't know, 20 HP, and if it hit, it would probably be a great-sword plus momentum.

While I agree the rules are a tool, we need that firm base for PFS. I'm not saying we need the tree or illusion to be handled the exact same (although I can see where that misconception could occur). I'm not saying you can't be creative, as I love players being creative. I am saying that creating things outside the realm of rule plausibility is not good.

Knocking down a tree, faking a fire (or just lighting a town on fire), cool uses of environment, etc. all have some rule base for me to go off of and use. Illusions generally have saves for those that directly interact, typical break DC for wood, etc. We aren't suddenly shoving something Mythic level into the campaign, or creating an entire new rule, just taking bits and pieces to make something function pretty well.

Also, a GM who says you can't try to knock down a Tree is a poor one. Let them waste turns! ;)

Just saying that, as cool as the Lich story is, that's not happening in PFS. Being creative? Allowed. Doing something completely out of any rules jurisdiction? Not allowed.

As neat as it is, we need more consistency than that. If a player came to my table saying something like this:

"My last GM said a cleric could sacrifice themselves to kill undead! No save!"

I'd say it was cool, but no means PFS legal unless a rule said you could do so.

As for the Core being easier for GMS debate:

I see it easier as you don't have to spend time either learning new rules from a player or questioning them.

For example, I have no idea how a Magus works. At all. I've trusted the players tthat I've GMed for that had them, but I'm not clear what can be spell combated, or if that's the right phrase, or anything really. And there are corner cases up to table GMs that I don't feel knowledgeable enough to call.

While I don't need to know that for every session, if I don't know that, it can be a real slow down trying to learn that one or two times. Or I'll make a rash call that changes the power level of a PC.

Core means I need to know the Core book, mostly. That's all that will be thrown at me. I know I'll need to know darkness and daylight, heightened continual flame, etc., but I don't need to know the range increment of firearms or the weapon cord cheese of it, the occult stuff, and the corner cases that are up to table variation.

Tl;dr : I find Core easier to GM for.

In my super limited CORE experience (all 3 scenarios worth, and all the 1st level adventures currently allowed), CORE didn't seem that much of power limiter, as some of the basic, powerful options are available. At the same time, we didn't steamroll the scenario. In Confirmation, we fought [REDACTED] as soon as possible, so there were some tense moments, but a debuff Sorcerer, 2+ fighters, a cleric, and a rogue can still make a pretty effective party.

Overall, the newer scenarios (from 4 on) seem generally pretty good. There are some that obviously easy, but most at least make me use up a few wand charges and have a few tense moments. Prior to season 4, I needed to play up to have a challenge (and that was with only hard books, I hardly use splats).

Now, is there a need to be more challenging? I think not. We don't want to scare away players because it is too difficult, and there are a few scenarios that are known for challenge (Like any GMed by Baird :) ). I would not be against more of the difficult scenarios (Waking Rune, Bone keep, etc) being available, but at the same time, I have yet to play those "tough" ones (out of fear, mainly.)

I see a good mix. Personally, I never really build humans anymore, since I hate darkness. A lot. Like, a lot a lot. So Half-orcs forever!

Unless I'm making a real feat heavy build (or one that benefits from DEX, like Gunslinger/Unchained Rogue/Slashing Grace anything) I'll be half orc. I'll use boons when I get them, but after having each one be unlocked the next season, I'm not in a rush to get them either :)

To topic: The idea of unlocking races via a story line of scenarios sounds really appealing, as long as it is kept appropriately in check. If everyone is [Insert Race], it can loose the charm of being unique (in race terms, at least).

Zauron13 wrote:

While I don't have a source on me at the moment, my reading is yes, you can use current, legal faction traits in Core (as the Guide to Organized Play is allowed to be used in Core).

Obviously, you can not use old traits that are no longer legal, retired faction traits, etc.

fixed that for you...

Thanks. Just edited mine to be correct.

While I don't have a source on me at the moment, my reading is yes, you can use current, legal faction traits in Core (as the Guide to Organized Play is allowed to be used in Core).

Obviously, you can not use old traits that are no longer legal, retired faction traits, etc.

Zauron13 wrote:

I think we are creating needless abstractions and complex rules for what was supposed to be an otherwise simple ruling (in my mind, at least).

Core Spells Known: CORE, plus any you use a scroll (found on chronicle) or spell book to learn (Including the forum/blog/FAQ post about spontaneous casters also being allowed to do so).

Wands of Non-Core spells: Still function the same, you just cannot buy them unless they appear on a chronicle sheet. Much like unique items that are not always available, that is the only way to acquire them, but they still function as such. Wands are not enough to allow you to learn the spell (since you normally cannot learn a spell from a Wand anyway)

That's how I view it. Now, to answer OP:

IMO, no, having access to a spell is not enough to purchase wand/potion/scroll of it, based on the "No Crafting" segment of PFS.

How I like to see Core is a weird reset of Golarion rules: There aren't a lot of Non-Core wizards opening shops (you can't purchase Non-core stuff generally), so you would have to make the item. But you can't craft, so you are not allowed to have non-core spells as items unless they appear on a chronicle.

But what if you are a Wizard with, say, Vanish in your spellbook due to running across a scroll of it at some point. You also use a bonded item, a wand. Due to Pathfinder rules, and the PFS FAQ, you can, effectively, use Crafting on your bonded item, which is a wand, so can you make that a wand of Vanish?

That's a really good point I totally forgot of. That sounds like a good question for someone official, actually.

Hmmmm.... imo, you would be limited to Core spells for the wand creation, but I'd be fine the other way (but only since this is a rare case).

I think we are creating needless abstractions and complex rules for what was supposed to be an otherwise simple ruling (in my mind, at least).

Core Spells Known: CORE, plus any you use a scroll (found on chronicle) or spell book to learn (Including the forum/blog/FAQ post about spontaneous casters also being allowed to do so).

Wands of Non-Core spells: Still function the same, you just cannot buy them unless they appear on a chronicle sheet. Much like unique items that are not always available, that is the only way to acquire them, but they still function as such. Wands are not enough to allow you to learn the spell (since you normally cannot learn a spell from a Wand anyway)

That's how I view it. Now, to answer OP:

IMO, no, having access to a spell is not enough to purchase wand/potion/scroll of it, based on the "No Crafting" segment of PFS.

How I like to see Core is a weird reset of Golarion rules: There aren't a lot of Non-Core wizards opening shops (you can't purchase Non-core stuff generally), so you would have to make the item. But you can't craft, so you are not allowed to have non-core spells as items unless they appear on a chronicle.

#TheSocietyRemembers

Not only were the bloodlines nice, but getting that energy resistance is killer too. We had a puzzle that damaged us for getting wrong, but the tiefling in the group resisted the damage (unless max was rolled). So, being frustrated at that point, we just did all permutations.

It was really hard to not be either one. I even had a build figured out to get a 25 AC at first level as a Tiefling. Of course, you couldn't do much of anything else but fight, but...

Since they are boon races now, I think it would be interesting if a boon allowed you to be a Gnome Aasimar (or whatever non-human base), but it is what it is.

Not allowing discounts cuts down on words and complex rules, probably. For example, if you use a discount on a not always available item, what cost do you use to figure out minimum Fame? If I can spend 2 for a discount of 750, why not 4 for 1500? Or 6 for 2250, and so on.

It also helps power balance. You know easily that it's 4 (or whatever) sessions of gold for a magic weapon. If you had a discount with PP, you might get it a session or two earlier, but other characters might save PP instead, which means you can't plan on magic weapons at certain points, and...

It's just simpler.

While I agree with all that had been said, a few things I'd like to address anyway.

Ranged Touch Attack : these are not auto hits. Basically, you would roll as if you were doing a regular ranged attack (Dex mod, BAB, etc). The only difference is that the target has to use their Touch AC, which means no bonus from that Full plate or chain shirt.

Melee Touch: same as ranged, but use your modifiers for Melee.

Other than that, it really is just best to read through some spells. Feel free to ask for help from other players at the table too!

So between this and the threads on slavery, how does one even play anything other than a true neutral fighter with no ties. I seriously want to know. I see threads where even the thought of raising the dead should have you kicked out of the game. But having strong religious beliefs could also be being a jerk. Owning slaves is being a jerk and needs to be abolished, but if you press your anti-slavery Andoran feelings to hard its also a problem. Is this more of a board thing or is playing anything with a belief system possibly asking for trouble.

It's mostly the aspect of viewing message boards or the internet in general. I've never played or GMed in a game where a character had any issues with another person. I've had issues with players, which is the problem. Jerks will be jerks, no matter the character. Basically, it all comes down to compromise, and fun party banter/RP instead of issues.

For example, my Inquisitor of Mephistopheles plays up the contract angle and hands players a contract (which I actually made). I never force anyone to sign it to receive healing, as it is pure fluff. When a Paladin adventures with the group, we play up the fact that they would not sign an Infernal contract, we spend a few minutes laughing and having fun, and move on.

Now, a jerk player in the same situation could do the following: Inquisitor : Refuse to heal a player that didn't sign the contract. Push for the contract to be signed excessively and rubbing other players wrong. Etc.
Paladin: Refuse to adventure with the inquisitor. Refuse to protect or heal when needed because of the Infernal angle. Stonewall progress to get back at the inquisitor.

tl;dr
The issue is a jerk player, not any character concept.

I blame Grandmaster Torch for your inability to take that seriously.

I blame Grandmaster Torch for you blaming Grandmaster Torch. ;)

Personally, I wouldn't be in support of it. As a Paladin, I think, although casting an Evil Spell isn't technically evil by house rule, neither is poison, which is one of the things called out by a Paladin not to do. (Under Code of Conduct, acting with honor). While they aren't equitable, the sense of evil and wrong would, imo, make a Paladin feel so uneasy as to want (but not need) an atonement. It doesn't seem Paladiny to me to use Infernal Healing.

If the player makes a real good argument for it, I might allow it. But it's not that great of a spell to argue about. It's nice, but I'd be fine with my CLW wand if I was playing a really good guy, like a Paladin.

If they have somatic, you need a free hand to cast them. The only work around I can think of is Still Spell Metamagic. I am happy to be wrong though, if someone else with much more system-fu knows of something else.

I forgot another way to get boons: The boon trading thread. I can't link it right now, but it's in Society General Discussion. Cash offers are frowned upon/not allowed, but trading boons for other boons, books, minis and such are allowed.