|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
Unfortunately, the rules just flat out contradict on this. There is no RAW answer. Which leaves with trying to determine intent. I think that it can be parried. Two reasons.
1. Under critical hits, it says "When you make an attack roll and get a natural 20 (the d20 shows 20), you hit regardless of your target's Armor Class". This suggests that the autosuccess is targeted at AC specifically.
2. The natural 20 doesn't allow you to overcome concealment, so its not a "you hit regardless of circumstance" thing. This backs up that autohit is aimed at AC.
Mysterious Avenger's Greater Charmed Life doesn't specify a duration. How long is the charisma to AC bonus is supposed to last?
Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
Yes, I didn't men to be incomplete. For Charm Person, they wouldn't care until it wears off. But stuff like Detect Thoughts they will still care though.
Another interesting area is Detect Evil. Its common for players to spam it, but depending on the emanation that could terrify the locals.
Well can you point to another dev or a text source that contradicts what he has said?
What I have said is all pretty vague on whether or not someone who fails his save notices that he had to make a save.
Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
James Jacob said otherwise. Even if the NPC fails its save, it still knows that something was attacking its mind. The Succubus does get a bluff check, but the specifics of the manifestation would matter here.
That all depends on the specifics of the manifestations. If Charm Person involved blinking lights around the target, then you could spot the spell without spotting the caster.
According to Jacobs, you always know if you attempt to make a save(barring one specific feat).I don't know if a FAQ says this though.
GM Rednal wrote:
That is how many GMs play casters already.
Despite what the FAQ says, a lot of the monsters that hide among humanity sure look like they should be secretly casting charm spells and spell like abilities(Succubus for instance).
The succubus charming an NPC doesn't work as well if flashy glowing lights appear around her.
The good thing about the soul gem strategy is the enemy can't escape or be freed. Its soul gets permanently destroyed when you use it as a spell component.
Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
That certainly isn't how racism is interpreted IRL. A group or organization that dedicated itself to helping whites would definitely be viewed as racists.
Thats a good point. Aroden was the god of humanity and he was lawful neutral. Angradd mostly cares about dwarves and he is lawful good.
If this is so obvious, you should be able to cite that in the text.
Plenty of people argue that inflict light wounds is "obviously" evil, even though its not.
You need more than that to demonstrate something is actually inherently evil.
If you can't cite text supporting it, then they are house rules you made up.
hand crossbow and repeating crossbow. basically a crossbow pump shotgun for a world where guns don't exist but alchemists and grenades do. would love it if my DM allowed pistols. trying to cobble together an combat/field operative. it needs a ranged weapon.
You can already get reloading a light crossbow as a free action with rapid reload and a regular crossbow with Crossbow Mastery.
Crossbows suck though unless you are a Bolt Ace.
Boomerang Nebula wrote:
You can apply the logic to lawful evil people too.
Umbral Reaver wrote:
Better versioN: souleater probes use the evil soul gems themselves to build more souleater probes. That way they aren't destroying starsystems.
I didn't intend to suggest I would starve the entire abyss alone. More like a side job I do during normal adventuring.
Like "Oh, we just killed the Chaotic Evil BBG, lets soul gem and destroy his soul instead of it going to the Abyss".
Where do the rules say the alignment effects build up rather than cancels out with each other?
Thats no different than say, drug addiction. Yet we have plenty of very useful studies on how frequently people can take drugs without suffering the addictive effects and what measures can be taken to prevent addiction.
Chaotic Evil is an easier target for agreement, but yeah, it makes sense to use it on any Evil person you are going to kill anyway.
The Sideromancer wrote:
Assuming this works, what do you intend to do about the armies of Qlippoth and Devils that are now no longer busy fighting Demons?
Pathfinder isn't 3.5, we don't have the Blood Wars. And based on the Book of the Damned series, Demons and Devils spend more time killing innocent people and Good outsiders than they do each other.
As for Qlippoths, they are clearly less of a threat than Demons, seeing as how easily the Demons defeated the Qlippoths.
Edit: Also IIRC Qlippoths only want to wipe out humanity because it would starve the demons. If demons weren't a threat anymore, they would probably go back to not caring.
Horror Adventures disagree with you. It states that regardless of what purpose you use for the spell, casting it too much shifts your alignment.
For that to be the case, the spell itself has to outweigh whatever actions you take with the spell.
Obviously a full study would have to be more rigorous. The goal here is to minimize change to personality in mindset.
You could view evil spells like addictive drug use. That also alters a persons mindset, but thanks to careful research and proper prescriptions millions of people are able to take the drugs without being addicted.
It would produce some very useful results. Using alignment detection spells, we can find the point where people's alignment changes.
By repeatedly performing the experiment, I could determine something like "It takes a mean of 5 Good spellcastings to switch from Neutral to Good, with a Standard Deviation of 0.7 spellcastings. By contrast, it only took 3 Evil spellcastings to switch from Good to neutral with a standard deviation of 0.3 spellcasts. So then I can be 99.9% confident if I cast 8 Good spells for every 2 Evil spells, then I will remain Good".
This is very useful info for someone who wants to safely use evil spells.
The exact number doesn't matter. Protection From Evil/Good/Law/Chaos are 1st level spell with no cost associated. If a 5th wizard has a free week he can cast it 50+ times.
All he really needs to know is an order of magnitude. IE If casting 10 good spells is generally enough, then he can cast 50 and be pretty sure his alignment has shifted(verified by someone with detect good ideally).
Incidently, this is how a lot of real life science is done. Data has noise and uncertainty, but you can compensate through probabilistic analysis.
That is an interesting point. The rules say that good and evil spells follow the same rules.
So if using infernal healing is a minor Evil act regardless of how much good it does, then logically murdering someone with Holy Word is still a Good action.
No they don't. You can use the soul gems as spell components or for magical crafting and the soul is permanently destroyed.
"In these cases, souls should be assigned values based on the categories presented here and then treated as material components, reducing the gold expenditure necessary to cast the spell according to the souls’ value. (Thus a spell that requires 400 gp to cast might instead cost 300 gp and a basic-level soul.) Souls used in this manner are consumed and destroyed utterly."
Which is when my character casts Protection From Evil enough to become Good.
I can control what spells my character casts, so no I won't stop casting Evil spells. I will just case enough Good spells to maintain my alignment.
Exactly. Best case scenario, killing a chaotic evil person consigns them to horrible torture with them either becoming a demon or making another demon more powerful(worst case would be they get resurrected or come back as undead to cause even more harm).
The only realistic alternative I see is with Create Soul Gem.
Which is why if you want to maintain a Good alignment you should regularly casting of Protection From Evil or Celestial Healing to counterbalance it.
Thats objectively not true per Horror Adventures. People can use evil spells for good reasons. It even lists that as a grey area morally.
So no, you don't have to have selfish reasons.
DM Beckett wrote:
In PFS being evil means you get kicked from the game, and they definitely do not want GMs having to decide whether to kick a player from the table for casting an evil spell too often.
People don't fit into boxes so easily. Heck, take things that we "know" are wrong today(like racism or slavery). Look back in history and you will find people who were altruistic, kind and selfless who still supported those things.
Someone could be altruistic selfless and kind while thinking its okay to cast evil spells. Maybe my character isn't concerned with the overarching constructs of "Good" and "Evil", he just wants to help people and sees that these particular spells will do that.
According to the developers, it isn't a forcible change in your personality. The alignment change is simply a result of your actions, not a forcible change in your behavior.
So you really can have an evil alignment while being altruistic, respecting life, and making sacrifices to help others.
Okay so apparently Melee cohorts have trouble staying alive during mythic trials because our barbarian kicked it in the middle of our second mythic trial. Thankfully she got back up after breath of life.
Melee is a bad choice for cohorts. Melee characters are the most gear and level dependent.
Ideal choices for cohorts are classes that can provide buffs and debuffs from afar and focus on surviving. Clerics, wizards, bards, etc.
Fighting evil is a good reason to cast Protection from Evil. So by your logic, demons are good because they spend a lot of time fighting evil creatures.
Shatter Defenses is mostly good for rogues who want to ensure sneak attacks.
Main issue I see is that a Red Mantis Assassin NPC basically would try to sneak up on a player, 1 shot him then leave. Thats really all its built to do.
And from what I have heard, that is really unfun for the players.
Apparently, complex characters aren't allowed. Either you are 100% good/evil all the time, or you are crazy.
Pathfinder has rules for mental issues and none of them talk about performing both good and evil actions.
I have GMed 2 players just fine.
Just make sure they build somewhat flexible characters. If one of them plays a spellcaster it will help things a lot. I also advise not starting at level 1. Start them at level 3 so they have some more skills and abilities.
Plenty of evil people do good things, and good people regularly disagree over what the good thing to do is.
Someone could think evil spells are okay while otherwise being a good person. That isn't a mental problem, just a difference of philosophy.
Its a 9th level spell subject to a lot of GM fiat, of course its going to be broken.
Do you have a source for that?
The helm of opposite alignment explicitly say it does that, but I can't find anything that makes it a general rule.
Plenty of reasons. Everyone wants a shortcut into Heaven. Plenty of evil people aren't devil worshippers and don't want to go to hell. Or maybe he just wants to avoid getting detected/smited by Paladins.
The player can always cast more Protection from Evil. Its a level 1 spell, take a week off between adventures and cast a few dozen of them.
The sidebar was very clear repeated castings do cause an alignment shift, even if your actions outweigh casting an aligned spell occasionally.