| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
There are no defined rules for this. Even casting [evil] spells isn't really an evil act (in PFS wizards cast infernal healing all the time).
I go by the guidelines in the 3.0 Book of Vile Darkness which are along the lines you have delineated.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Cannabialism (which in a fanatasy world means eating of the flesh/drink blood of a intelligent creature).
Is eating the following considered Evil:
- Red Dragon Ribs in Honey and Chilli Glaze
- Cutlet from an awakened Dire Boar that evil druid used to keep around
- shish-kebabs from those talking dinosaurs that tried to eat us alive the other day on Castrovel
Just curious.
Per the CRB
Evil implies hurting, oppressing, and killing others. Some evil creatures simply have no compassion for others and kill without qualms if doing so is convenient. Others actively pursue evil, killing for sport or out of duty to some evil deity or master.
Take it for what you will.
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
I have been reading some other threads, and I am stunned by people's ideas of what is and is not an "Evil Act".
Well, it's the internet: there are lots of silly people with nonsensical ideas, and they're all sure that the silly people with nonsensical ideas are everyone but themselves.
So the only people whose definitions of an "evil act" in Pathfinder are those at your own table. (Or, in the case of PFSOP, also any such information given by Mike Brock or Mark Moreland.)
|
|
imho, yes, those all count as cannibialism in a fantasy world, and I as a Game Master would rule eating them as an evil actCannabialism (which in a fanatasy world means eating of the flesh/drink blood of a intelligent creature).
Is eating the following considered Evil:
- Red Dragon Ribs in Honey and Chilli Glaze
- Cutlet from an awakened Dire Boar that evil druid used to keep around
- shish-kebabs from those talking dinosaurs that tried to eat us alive the other day on CastrovelJust curious.
Why is eating a boar kosher, but eating a boar that used to shout *I'm gonna kill you RAWR* makes me Smite Evil material?
So there is no guideline at all in Pathfinder? Its all subject to Gamemaster interpretation? I find that hard to believe. From what I have seen on these threads, there are some pretty questionable ideas as what is evil. And give me a break, casting a spell with the evil descriptor isn't evil?
By RAW, yes.
I am hoping Ultimate Campaign will gives us some guidance on alignment in the way the two 3.X alignment books did.
|
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Hey, that's a good challenge. Let's see what I can do with this list :
Betrayal : like infiltrating an evil cult to betray them to Paladins ?
murder : you mean what PCs do everyday to monsters and enemies ?
worshipping evil god/demons/devils : I will be happy to tell that to all the Neutral Clerics of Evil entities (especially those in the PFS)
animating or creating undead : check the Juju mystery and its revelation Spirit Vessels for animating Neutral and Good undead
using an evil spell : summoning a devil is Evil right ? And summoning an angel is Good right ? And summoning an angel to kill it, flay it and make his skin into magic item is still Good, right ?
consorting with demons/devils : I will be happy to tell all LN and LG Hellknights, especially the Paladins
using others for personal gain : not sure on what this one means. You mean like benefitting from a cohort or followers ?
bullying/cowing : there goes Intimidate, I guess. Poor misunderstood half-orcs
gain pleasure from causing despair, pain and suffering : what about getting pleasure from delivering justice to criminals (which might just include the despair, pain and suffering of the aforementioned criminals)
tempting good individuals to do evil acts : still trying to understand precisely what an "evil act" is ;-)
Cannabialism (which in a fanatasy world means eating of the flesh/drink blood of a intelligent creature) : what about using the body parts of an intelligent creature ? Say a Dragon's hide for example. What about respectful and ritual cannibalism of the dead like we see in some RL societies ? Or when you have just nothing else available to eat for weeks ?
lying : there goes Bluff, I guess. Also it makes the description of what will make a Paladin fall a bit redundant
theft : there goes Sleight of Hand. Does it include graverobbing too ? What about stealing from the bodies of slain enemies ?
and cheating : not following the rules is definitely non-Lawful (or even Chaotic), which is not the same thing as Evil though
A most entertaining exercise. Thanks a lot for it :-)
So there is no guideline at all in Pathfinder? Its all subject to Gamemaster interpretation? I find that hard to believe. From what I have seen on these threads, there are some pretty questionable ideas as what is evil. And give me a break, casting a spell with the evil descriptor isn't evil?
I don't know. If a Good Cleric (or Cleric of a Good deity) CAN'T cast a spell with the Evil descriptor that kind of says "Casting it is Evil" to me.
A cleric can't cast spells of an alignment opposed to her own or her deity's (if she has one). Spells associated with particular alignments are indicated by the chaotic, evil, good, and lawful descriptors in their spell descriptions.
So there is no guideline at all in Pathfinder? Its all subject to Gamemaster interpretation? I find that hard to believe. From what I have seen on these threads, there are some pretty questionable ideas as what is evil. And give me a break, casting a spell with the evil descriptor isn't evil?
Did you not read my post?
Also,
The descriptors are acid, air, chaotic, cold, darkness, death, earth, electricity, evil, fear, fire, force, good, language-dependent, lawful, light, mind-affecting, sonic, and water.
Most of these descriptors have no game effect by themselves, but they govern how the spell interacts with other spells, with special abilities, with unusual creatures, with alignment, and so on.
According to the CRB it's arguable they're the same. All it mentions is killing, the act of ending a life. There are a lot of options available to even fighters to subdue enemies without killing them.
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
According to the CRB it's arguable they're the same. All it mentions is killing, the act of ending a life. There are a lot of options available to even fighters to subdue enemies without killing them.
But we also have to keep in mind that there are few (if any) good-aligned deities whose favored weapon is the sap.
When a deity is Good, and imparts their clerics with proficiency in longswords or scimitars or bastard swords or whatever, we have to assume that it's possible to use that proficiency for its intended purpose without forcing yourself away from the alignment of said deity by doing so.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There is one thing the game says is an Evil or Good act, casting a spell with that descriptor ([Good]/[Evil]). There's a lot of people that hate that ruling, but the devs have said that is the intent (so yes, Infernal Healing is an evil act to cast, although it's somewhat mitigated usually by the fact you're healing someone for theoretically altruistic reasons).
Beyond that, I personally consider the following Evil in my own games.
Killing Non-Hostile/Non-Threatening Sentient Entities
Torture (regardless of sentience)
Releasing Evil Entities into the Mortal Realm
Attempting to Destroy the World
Beyond those, anything else is really dependent upon circumstances. Usually hurting others in some way for personal gain or pleasure tends to be evilish, and if you do it often enough, you start shifting alignments.
Note that it is very hard to become 'Smiteable' evil from one act (except maybe Attempting to Destroy the World). It usually takes quite a lot of activity to change alignments, although I will bring it up to the player if they start off the game playing their character CN instead of LG from day one.
There is one thing the game says is an Evil or Good act, casting a spell with that descriptor ([Good]/[Evil]). There's a lot of people that hate that ruling, but the devs have said that is the intent (so yes, Infernal Healing is an evil act to cast, although it's somewhat mitigated usually by the fact you're healing someone for theoretically altruistic reasons).
Can you cite this?
Standard Disclaimer: Also what devs != rules, as we all know (until there is errata/new rules in a book).
I now picture an adventure where citizens are turning evil due to (unknowingly) eating the flesh of awakened animals served by the evil meat-packing industry. And those who die in such a state are coming back as ghouls, due to the cannibalism.imho, yes, those all count as cannibialism in a fantasy world, and I as a Game Master would rule eating them as an evil actCannabialism (which in a fanatasy world means eating of the flesh/drink blood of a intelligent creature).
Is eating the following considered Evil:
- Red Dragon Ribs in Honey and Chilli Glaze
- Cutlet from an awakened Dire Boar that evil druid used to keep around
- shish-kebabs from those talking dinosaurs that tried to eat us alive the other day on CastrovelJust curious.
Brilliant. Fund it.
I have been reading some other threads, and I am stunned by people's ideas of what is and is not an "Evil Act". Let me make sure I am being clear: what I am talking about is an act that will cause your character to detect as, and therefore be smited as, evil.
Alignment is and should be based off cultural perception.
Also it’s all in the motive behind the Acton…
I played a GOOD priest which once walked into a graveyard of soldiers and raised them as undead.. While saying “Raise my fellow soldiers, we plea to you once more, defend your homeland”
Once the attack was over... I dismissed the spell and thanked the souls for their service… I then spent a week speaking with the dead to find out who each one was, if I could send a message to their family, of if they wanted me to look in on them.
How is that an evil act again?
Betrayal?
You Betray your friends to save them, common theme… you have a chance to “switch sides” but you have to turn your friends in. You KNOW for a fact that they are going to be ambushed and killed by morning (overwhelming odds). You take the offer “save” them, later working to break them out.
Or what if you have to Betray a friend for honor?
Murder?
Infiltrate an enemy army and assassinate an evil priest before he can summon demons to reinforce his masters forces?
I can do this all day
According to the CRB it's arguable they're the same. All it mentions is killing, the act of ending a life. There are a lot of options available to even fighters to subdue enemies without killing them.But we also have to keep in mind that there are few (if any) good-aligned deities whose favored weapon is the sap.
When a deity is Good, and imparts their clerics with proficiency in longswords or scimitars or bastard swords or whatever, we have to assume that it's possible to use that proficiency for its intended purpose without forcing yourself away from the alignment of said deity by doing so.
As long as you're acting within the confines of the deity's domain and ethos then I can agree with that. For example, I think it's Iomedea who believes that most anyone can be redeemed. For her I would say that those cleric's would only use lethal force against the most staunchly "unsavable," those who have time and time again committed acts of unrepentant evil, made blood pacts with evil beings, etc.
Whereas for Sarenrae I would think her clerics would be a bit more quick to act.
However, in most of the backgrounds of these gods we only see them being quick and harsh against fiends, devils and the like. Essentially: outsiders who's very being is built with evil energies to destroy and corrupt. I haven't seen a single chronicle where they've killed humanoids or intelligent creatures who are by nature neutral and can choose either good or evil at any moment nearly as quickly as I see most people play their characters.
I have been reading some other threads, and I am stunned by people's ideas of what is and is not an "Evil Act". Let me make sure I am being clear: what I am talking about is an act that will cause your character to detect as, and therefore be smited as, evil.
Alignment is and should be based off cultural perception.
Also it’s all in the motive behind the Acton…
I played a GOOD priest which once walked into a graveyard of soldiers and raised them as undead.. While saying “Raise my fellow soldiers, we plea to you once more, defend your homeland”
Once the attack was over... I dismissed the spell and thanked the souls for their service… I then spent a week speaking with the dead to find out who each one was, if I could send a message to their family, of if they wanted me to look in on them.
How is that an evil act again?
Betrayal?
You Betray your friends to save them, common theme… you have a chance to “switch sides” but you have to turn your friends in. You KNOW for a fact that they are going to be ambushed and killed by morning (overwhelming odds). You take the offer “save” them, later working to break them out.
Or what if you have to Betray a friend for honor?Murder?
Infiltrate an enemy army and assassinate an evil priest before he can summon demons to reinforce his masters forces?
I can do this all day
Relativistic alignment makes no sense in a game where you can detect someones alignment and creatures who are inherently associated with an alignment (many outsiders) are running about.
Relativistic alignment makes no sense in a game where you can detect someones alignment and creatures who are inherently associated with an alignment (many outsiders) are running about.
Just showing that it's the MOTIVE behind the action that makes it evil.
how are the examples above "evil"
~~~~~~~~~~~~
EVIL
1
a : morally reprehensible : sinful, wicked <an evil impulse>
b : arising from actual or imputed bad character or conduct <a person of evil reputation>
2
a archaic : inferior
b : causing discomfort or repulsion : offensive <an evil odor>
c : disagreeable <woke late and in an evil temper>
3
a : causing harm : pernicious <the evil institution of slavery>
b : marked by misfortune : unlucky
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
note by #3 almost every adventure is evil
|
|
How terribly interesting.....Now based on this, I played my cleric of Asmodeus in society last night, and proceeded to command all of the undead that we encountered. After telling the other pcs that I would, and only use them for the current cause of the society. When the mission was done, I let the party beat the things to smithereens.
Also, along the line of spell descriptors, it has caused an interesting wrinkle with said cleric. If I am reading it right, he cannot cast proection from evil, as its a good act and would violate his gods edicts. I have also ran into opposition when I let others know that I could summon something evil.
Relativistic alignment makes no sense in a game where you can detect someones alignment and creatures who are inherently associated with an alignment (many outsiders) are running about.Just showing that it's the MOTIVE behind the action that makes it evil.
how are the examples above "evil"
~~~~~~~~~~~~
EVIL
1
a : morally reprehensible : sinful, wicked <an evil impulse>
b : arising from actual or imputed bad character or conduct <a person of evil reputation>
2
a archaic : inferior
b : causing discomfort or repulsion : offensive <an evil odor>
c : disagreeable <woke late and in an evil temper>
3
a : causing harm : pernicious <the evil institution of slavery>
b : marked by misfortune : unlucky~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
note by #3 almost every adventure is evil
Creating undead (inherently evil) creatures isn't evil? News to me. Of course, since there are no real pathfinder guidelines we can argue about any specific action until the cows come home.
My comment was that relativistic alignment makes no sense. If two people from our world are transported into Golarion and one is a Buddhist vegetarian while the other is not, only one of them is right about whether eating meat is (morally) wrong. No relativism can exist.
That's not murder and it's not assassination, that is killing an enemy and defeating his forces with sound military doctrine: cutting the head off the snake. I AM a soldier, and I have fought besides soldiers of different countries and cultures and all of them will say the same thing.Murder?
Infiltrate an enemy army and assassinate an evil priest before he can summon demons to reinforce his masters forces?
I can do this all day
I agree with you 100%
what about Assassinating an evil king because he EVIL (like wow he likes to have people hung when he eats dinner evil) but his son is not (as always shown a distaste for his fathers actions, even publicly)?
In society play? One of the rules of the society is to not aggress upon another member of the society.
Creating undead (inherently evil) creatures isn't evil? News to me. Of course, since there are no real pathfinder guidelines we can argue about any specific action until the cows come home.My comment was that relativistic alignment makes no sense. If two people from our world are transported into Golarion and one is a Buddhist vegetarian while the other is not, only one of them is right about whether eating meat is (morally) wrong. No relativism can exist.
how are mindless creatures evil again? oh yes that "negative energy" thing.
but that's kind of like calling a sword "evil" it's a tool, its how it's used that defines the action.
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
As long as you're acting within the confines of the deity's domain and ethos then I can agree with that. For example, I think it's Iomedea who believes that most anyone can be redeemed. For her I would say that those cleric's would only use lethal force against the most staunchly "unsavable," those who have time and time again committed acts of unrepentant evil, made blood pacts with evil beings, etc.
Whereas for Sarenrae I would think her clerics would be a bit more quick to act.
Actually, it's Sarenrae (the Dawnflower) who's known for redemption.
However, in most of the backgrounds of these gods we only see them being quick and harsh against fiends, devils and the like. Essentially: outsiders who's very being is built with evil energies to destroy and corrupt. I haven't seen a single chronicle where they've killed humanoids or intelligent creatures who are by nature neutral and can choose either good or evil at any moment nearly as quickly as I see most people play their characters.
In the Osirian deserts, followers of Sarenrae (wielding her favored weapon: the scimitar) have been known to go on raids against evil cults - whose members are intelligent humanoids.
Creating undead (inherently evil) creatures isn't evil? News to me. Of course, since there are no real pathfinder guidelines we can argue about any specific action until the cows come home.My comment was that relativistic alignment makes no sense. If two people from our world are transported into Golarion and one is a Buddhist vegetarian while the other is not, only one of them is right about whether eating meat is (morally) wrong. No relativism can exist.
how are mindless creatures evil again? oh yes that "negative energy" thing.
but that's kind of like calling a sword "evil" it's a tool, its how it's used that defines the action.
If the sword was evil, it would be an evil tool.
Zombies and skeletons are evil. Full stop.
As long as you're acting within the confines of the deity's domain and ethos then I can agree with that. For example, I think it's Iomedea who believes that most anyone can be redeemed. For her I would say that those cleric's would only use lethal force against the most staunchly "unsavable," those who have time and time again committed acts of unrepentant evil, made blood pacts with evil beings, etc.
Whereas for Sarenrae I would think her clerics would be a bit more quick to act.
Actually, it's Sarenrae (the Dawnflower) who's known for redemption.
However, in most of the backgrounds of these gods we only see them being quick and harsh against fiends, devils and the like. Essentially: outsiders who's very being is built with evil energies to destroy and corrupt. I haven't seen a single chronicle where they've killed humanoids or intelligent creatures who are by nature neutral and can choose either good or evil at any moment nearly as quickly as I see most people play their characters.In the Osirian deserts, followers of Sarenrae (wielding her favored weapon: the scimitar) have been known to go on raids against evil cults - whose members are intelligent humanoids.
Oh okay, thanks.
Riding against evil cults is one thing. If they've learned or divined that they're working with outsiders to corrupt others or to bring destruction to the world that's within that domain. However, if it's just a bunch of loons or people who are just wackjobs being wackjobs and don't pose any real threat to others then that would be wrong. I've seen players killing wackjobs for no other reason that to get XP.
Oh okay, thanks.
Riding against evil cults is one thing. If they've learned or divined that they're working with outsiders to corrupt others or to bring destruction to the world that's within that domain. However, if it's just a bunch of loons or people who are just wackjobs being wackjobs and don't pose any real threat to others then that would be wrong. I've seen players killing wackjobs for no other reason that to get XP.
Murder hobos: the murdering part 28.
Creating undead (inherently evil) creatures isn't evil? News to me. Of course, since there are no real pathfinder guidelines we can argue about any specific action until the cows come home.My comment was that relativistic alignment makes no sense. If two people from our world are transported into Golarion and one is a Buddhist vegetarian while the other is not, only one of them is right about whether eating meat is (morally) wrong. No relativism can exist.
how are mindless creatures evil again? oh yes that "negative energy" thing.
but that's kind of like calling a sword "evil" it's a tool, its how it's used that defines the action.
If the sword was evil, it would be an evil tool.
Zombies and skeletons are evil. Full stop.
What about a evil cleric who summons a good creature and forces it to "Kill those good guys over there?" I guess he becomes good?
Poor Paladin when he tries to smite evil on him!
Again, the sword and the creature is a tool.. just because I summon a Natural animal does not make me Natural .. its what I do with that animal.
What if I summon the undead and use them as manual labor to help get much needed supplies to feed starving kids?
what if by NOT summoning the undead I have doomed, lets say, 20% of those kids to death because we could not get the food their on time?
This is an alignment thread right? So isnt the answer batman?
Anyway, in all seriousness, I really think you need to differentiate chaotic form evil behavior. Stealing, Lying, cheating, these are not implicately evil acts, they are chaotic. Now mind you all of these things COULD be evil depending on circumstances, but they are evil because of the consequences, not the act themselves. For instance, stealing 100gp from a rich noble, is chaotic. Stealing 5 copper from a poor farmer so his family starves, evil. Lying about whether or not that dress makes the bar maid look fat, chaotic (maybe), telling a lie in court that gets an innocent man executed, evil. Cheating at dice in a gambling hall, chaotic (maybe stupid depending on the hall's security). Cheating a struggling merchant on a deal that leave him and his family destitute and starving? Evil.
To me, good and evil are based on knowing consequences. If innocent people are harmed by my actions, the action is evil. If innocent people are helped by my actions, they are good. If innocents are mostly unnaffected its neutral.
What about a evil cleric who summons a good creature and forces it to "Kill those good guys over there?" I guess he becomes good?
You can't summon creatures with an alignment opposed to your own (using Summon Monster).
Poor Paladin when he tries to smite evil on him!
Again, the sword and the creature is a tool.. just because I summon a Natural animal does not make me Natural .. its what I do with that animal.
What if I summon the undead and use them as manual labor to help get much needed supplies to feed starving kids?
what if by NOT summoning the undead I have doomed, lets say, 20% of those kids to death because we could not get the food their on time?
You changed raising undead into summoning undead.
Creating undead is certainly an evil act because you are bringing evil into the world. Summoning evil (as a neutral character) is a bit different; there was a whole prestige class in 3.5 based on the idea of using evil against itself (the malconvoker). I could also see evil characters binding good outsiders to use as thralls. These are both inherently different than creating undead.
You can make a utilitarian argument for committing evil in order to create more good. This is the basis for paladins being allowed to temporarily join forces with evil characters. This does not mean that the evil act suddenly becomes non-evil because of your reasons for performing it.