|
Let me start this off by stating, yes i understand that you can not play the assassin prc as it requires you to be evil.
My question is, could someone take profession: Assassin for their dayjob. The reason i am asking is all based on the assassin guild vanity that you can purchase that allows you to be a member of an assassins guild. I understand that it does not give a bonus to said profession choice, but if its okay that i be a member of an assassins guild in PFS, would it also be okay if i was able to make money with said membership?
|
You can define your day job however you want within the confines of what profession, craft, and/or perform (or other skills based on vanities) allow you to do.
So if you wanted to call your profession, Profession (assassin), I would have no problem with that. But it is unlikely that it would get you any benefit within a scenario (some professions, craft and performance skills are useful and specifically written into a scenario, but those are typically limited to the lists within the Core Rule Book.) I also wouldn't allow you to use it to make yourself more intimidating or whatever.
But sure, if you just want it for fluff and for your day job, I wouldn't have a problem with it.
|
|
With Profession Assassin your basically saying you kill for money which is an evil act. The unlawful premeditated killing of one intelligent being by another.
Of course just about every adventurer fits this bill, they're not all Assassins but they sure are murderers....:P
Do we call Covert Government Operators assassins? Do we see them as evil, or are they just following orders given to them by their lawful supervisors. If they kill outside of their kingdom, do their laws apply?
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What a dark-hearted thing to do. Soren, let's say I want to take ranks in Profession (sacrificing innocent children to Moloch). Or Profession (whatever it takes that you'll consider an evil act). If I participate in that profession, I'm commiting an evil act.
It's just a day job, But it's an evil day job. Hope it pays for the atonement.
Why do characters who take ranks in the Assassin and Red-Mantis Assassin prestige classes need to be evil-aligned? Because the game rules define being an assassin as an evil act.
--
Put another way: you want to skirt the razor's edge and play a dark character. Congratulations: you've gotten to the point where some GMs think you're on one side of the line, and others think you've crossed it.
|
|
What a dark-hearted thing to do. Soren, let's say I want to take ranks in Profession (sacrificing innocent children to Moloch). Or Profession (whatever it takes that you'll consider an evil act). If I participate in that profession, I'm commiting an evil act.
It's just a day job, But it's an evil day job. Hope it pays for the atonement.
Why do characters who take ranks in the Assassin and Red-Mantis Assassin prestige classes need to be evil-aligned? Because the game rules define being an assassin as an evil act.
--
Put another way: you want to skirt the razor's edge and play a dark character. Congratulations: you've gotten to the point where some GMs think you're on one side of the line, and others think you've crossed it.
Thank you for this response. No sacrasm in that at all.
Why would the vanity exist in Pathfinder society to allow someone to join an assassins guild? You dont get your membership card and nifty decoder ring by sending in box tops. You gotta killed people.. Strike that, you have to MURDER people to prove that you got what it takes to join. But that is okay i guess because its just some PP and boom you got it.
This seems like the vanity is there to be a trap. If you take it, you get this okay bonus, oh and now your evil for being an assassin and cant play that character anymore.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
My thoughts on this are a little different. I'll go to real world pop culture for this. In the movie RED, Helen Mirren's character was, without a shadow of a doubt, an assassin. But did the fact that she committed what we would consider an evil act make her an evil person? No, it didn't. She was compassionate, loving, almost matronly.
As such, the rule on Evil Acts are plain as day. I would allow someone to have that profession, but before they did their day job, I would remind them that fact and let them know that by performing that particular day job would move them one step closer to evil and that if they do become evil aligned, that they will need to pay for atonement or else have the character reported as dead.
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
nosig, those are equally good reasons to allow an Assassin (Prestige Class) character to be non-evil. That isn't the game we're playing.
b]ssassins’ Guild[/b] (4 PP): A practical Pathfinder recognizes the benefit of being on good terms with the local assassins’ guild. While not necessarily an active assassin, you belong to an established assassins’ guild, and gain a +4 circumstance bonus on any single Bluff, Diplomacy, Intimidate, or Sense Motive check when dealing with other assassins of any guild, usable once per game session.
(emphasis mine)
Actually acting as an active assassin is an evil act in this game system. If you do so as a member of a Particular Faction, in a Particular Season 4 Scenario, you will move towards an evil alignment even though faction missions are usually exempt from alignment effects.
Now, in my home game, I'd be happy see a "James Bond" sort of character, being a non-evil assassin. I'd be happy to see non-evil Andorans learning Assassination techniques or even Red Mantis Assassin techniques to take out mean people. But, again, that's not the game we're asked to run.
To nosig's last note: commiting all manner of selfless, heroic, world-saving deeds never affects a PC's alignment. You can't accidentally "fall to good" in this game.
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
That's actually fairly ridiculous.
So we are now going to adjudicate evil acts that happen "off screen"?
Happy birthday, Andrew.
Again, let's say a player takes ranks in Profession (sacrificing children for the glory of Moloch). And she asks how much money she makes for sacrificing children to the glory of Moloch. (If you don't consider sacrificing children for the glory of Moloch to be an evil act, then substitute anything you like in there that you do find evil.)
I don't care whether that's gone into with graphic detail or not. It's an evil act. I would instruct the player to take the gold that her character made and buy an atonement with it.
People who are cool with Sorin assassinating people for money are suggesting two lines of reasoning:
- assassination isn't always evil; sometimes it's like James Bond or the Punisher.
- your PC isn't really doing things that the day job says he's doing.
I don't find either of those arguments compelling.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
But you know what? She plays great, and I have a lot of fun playing her - even with her "evil" ways.
You got to change your evil ways, baby. (SFW -- link to a particular song by Santana. :-D)
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Actually acting as an active assassin is an evil act in this game system.
Note that it said not necessarily an active assassin... not "you aren't an active assassin"
I mean, "Illegal killing for pay" pay as well be "profession pathfinder". What determines whether killing someone is evil or not is whether or not they deserve killing. Sure, turning away people that want to kill people who don't deserve it will cut into your business (a LOT) but I'm sure there are enough people who have it coming anyway to make a living off of it.
Also nosig, given what i've heard of chelaxian orphanages there's more potential for evil there than in the assassin business :)
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
BigNorseWolf, that's an excellent justification for non-evil members of the Assassin and Red-Mantis Assassin prestige classes, and in a home campaign, I'd be all good with that.
The language of the vanity is open-ended enough to allow players to use it in a campaign that does allow evil PCs. (The book addresses the in-world Pathfinder Society; it's not just for the PFS organized play environment.)
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The language of the vanity is open-ended enough to allow players to use it in a campaign that does allow evil PCs. (The book addresses the in-world Pathfinder Society; it's not just for the PFS organized play environment.)
Nothing I said is remotely home game, home brew, or not PFS, at all.
What you have is something specifically designed for PFS that says that you may in fact, be an assassin, but you don't have to be if you want to take it for the bonus.
On top of that you have an awful lot of scenarios and quests from good aligned factions that involve killing people.
"Someone has illegally enslaved my wife! This is where he works, Go kill him and you'll be rewarded" is a perfectly viable adventure hook. It is morally equivalent to "Help! someone has legally enslaved my wife! This is where he works, Go kill him, here's [your day job check here] gold"
nosig, those are equally good reasons to allow an Assassin (Prestige Class) character to be non-evil. That isn't the game we're playing.
b]ssassins’ Guild[/b] (4 PP): A practical Pathfinder recognizes the benefit of being on good terms with the local assassins’ guild. While not necessarily an active assassin, you belong to an established assassins’ guild, and gain a +4 circumstance bonus on any single Bluff, Diplomacy, Intimidate, or Sense Motive check when dealing with other assassins of any guild, usable once per game session.(emphasis mine)
Actually acting as an active assassin is an evil act in this game system. If you do so as a member of a Particular Faction, in a Particular Season 4 Scenario, you will move towards an evil alignment even though faction missions are usually exempt from alignment effects.
Now, in my home game, I'd be happy see a "James Bond" sort of character, being a non-evil assassin. I'd be happy to see non-evil Andorans learning Assassination techniques or even Red Mantis Assassin techniques to take out mean people. But, again, that's not the game we're asked to run.
I always thought the exact wording of "While not necessarily an active assassin" means that you don't have to be an assassin to join the guild, hence anyone can join it, not that you can't be an assassin.
It seems to imply more that you CAN be an assassin rather than can't.I agree that profession is about role-play, and that BigNorseWolf makes the best point: That in Golarion assassinations are easily justified. Any job can be evil if you choose to serve evil people or do it in an evil way, and with assassination, the opposite is true. Just because you are an assassin does not mean you kill in an evil way. Pathfinders are basically just traveling serial killers but they are not considered evil. Killing indiscriminately is evil. Killing itself is not(at least not in Golarion). I suppose you can use the 'assassin class' alignment restriction to mean that all assassinations are evil, as it specially says "yet the nature of their duties inevitably pushes them toward an evil alignment." I guess the fact that you are benefiting from it is the problem. I don't think any of the people here would have a problem if you were an assassin that didn't take money, E.G. you kill people for a just cause instead of personal gain, like a paladin. Hence it wouldn't be justifiable if it as your profession. I'm on the fence here.
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
I am not making my point very clearly. I can tell, because there's a huge issue for me in this, and nobody has addressed it. My apologies.
True story time. I'm putting this all under a spoiler cut. Don't click on it if you're offended, and be aware that there is trigger-language in there.
One guy wanted to take a rank in Perform (rape).
I immediately explained that, no, the campaign was PG-13, and besides, he couldn't play an evil character. He was clearly disappointed. I was picturing this guy playing with children at the table. Or a survivor. Or, hey, children, and a survivor, and the local reporter.
So, nosig, sometimes I am both a table GM and a censor. I think there is the potential for bad, wrong fun. When you say "Profession and Day Jobs are all about Role Play. The player has a free hand here to Play - please, let us NOT start restricting this," I think about that guy. As long as you keep insisting that all Day Jobs are hunky-dorry and completely free of consequences, I'm going to disagree.
There's a big difference between a Day Job that's sort of shady, like pickpocket or courtesan, and something that's illegal and evil, like drug pusher, assassin, or rapist. I'm willing to allow Profession (assassin) with an atonement, but that's as far a compromise as I'm willing to make.
Now, you can argue that being a professional assassin isn't really that bad. That's a discussion you can take up with the game designers. But as long as your position is that we have to allow any day job rolls anybody can think up, we're going to disagree. Call it table variation if you like.
My ninja has the profession "Cultural Attaché", ostensibly from the Tien embassy. He's very diplomatic, well versed in history and politics, and is very polite.
The title has the nice effect of being official sounding, yet few people have any idea what someone in that position actually does. There's a nifty real world meta-subtext as well, since covert operatives have sometimes used the title as cover.
The character is, of course, a spy. Which sometimes involves assassination. But that's all off-screen.
I find it a bit more palatable than "assassin".
-j
|
|
I am not making my point very clearly. I can tell, because there's a huge issue for me in this, and nobody has addressed it. My apologies.
True story time. I'm putting this all under a spoiler cut. Don't click on it if you're offended, and be aware that there is trigger-language in there.
** spoiler omitted **
There is a difference between your story and my question, in that, Paizo has created the vanity to be a member of an assassins guild and not created a vanity for that specific performance.
Is it better if it was called something different? Am i allowed to smell this red flower whose stem is covered in thorns as long as I dont call it what it is?
From what i've read, the majority think that it is fine to have profession: Assassin. as there hasnt been a grand arbitor who has weighed in as to "no you cant", I will go with it. Thank you for your input.
|
|
Happy birthday, Andrew.
Thanks Chris!
Again, let's say a player takes ranks in Profession (sacrificing children for the glory of Moloch).
I think you can agree there is a HUGE difference between Profession (assassin) and Profession (sacrificing children).
Here's how I'd approach it as a GM:
GM: Do you have a day job?
Player: Yup, my guy's an assassin.
GM: Ok, make your roll.
Player: 5gp
GM: So you offed the poor drunken sailor with the skimpy life-time of tips of the knocked up bar-maid who was bitter that he wouldn't marry her.
- and -
GM: Do you have a day job?
Player: Yup, my guy sacrifices children
GM: <eyeroll> Grow up.
Player: What?
GM: Seriously?
Player: Ok, fine, He's a janitor.
GM: Roll your dice.
Player: 20gp
GM: you did a great job sweeping up the theatre district last night.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Sacrificing children does not tend to be profitable.
:)
-j
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 8
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'd ask how the player performs his day job and expect a not-evil-character answer, which the "James Bond" type answer would be quite acceptable.
But if he has clearly evil intentions, and rolls a day job, his character is effectively performing an evil act with his day job.
This is how I see it. We have lots of instances in popular media of main characters assassinating people that "need to die" -- like the entire Assassin's Creed line of crap. This doesn't make it right if you believe it's wrong, but the popularity is enough to at least move the discussion into the grayer shades of things, where the possibility of being non-evil in PFS terms can exist alongside the act of killing for money.
That said, if a player ever did or suggested what Chris said with a character, they better start backpedaling hard or will find it hard to find a table in my area, as they won't ever be invited back. There are some things you don't joke about like that, and if you do, it should never happen in a shared public space. Things that are definitely not appropriate and highly offensive have no place in PFS.
|
|
No, because by campaign guidelines, you'd have to be evil to kill people for no other reason than money. You'd essentially be operating as an assasin even though you don't have the class.Let me start this off by stating, yes i understand that you can not play the assassin prc as it requires you to be evil.
My question is, could someone take profession: Assassin for their dayjob. The reason i am asking is all based on the assassin guild vanity that you can purchase that allows you to be a member of an assassins guild. I understand that it does not give a bonus to said profession choice, but if its okay that i be a member of an assassins guild in PFS, would it also be okay if i was able to make money with said membership?
The campaign guidelines say nothing of the sort.
|
|
They also say nothing of the sort for Profession:(Assassin) either. Since I am a PFS GM and at my table, you claimed that's what you did for your dayjob, I'd have to consider you to have slipped onto the Evil Bandwagon and then we'd get into all sorts of ugly campaign buisness. IF you think that's what Pathfinders do... then you have a very distorted view of the Society.The campaign guidelines say nothing of the sort.
No, because by campaign guidelines, you'd have to be evil to kill people for no other reason than money. You'd essentially be operating as an assasin even though you don't have the class.
First of all, dayjobs have nothing to do with being a member of the Pathfinder Society.
Secondly, there is absolutely nothing that says Profession (assassin) is evil. That's your subjective decision on that without taking a look at the actual actions of the character. Since day job actions are not adjudicated, and its a roll of the dice, you have no business adjudicating "off screen" actions as evil or not.
This isn't a home game.
And may I remind you, many in game faction missions require assassination. So you can't sit there and say that all precedence leads to assassination being evil.
|
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 8
|
No, because by campaign guidelines, you'd have to be evil to kill people for no other reason than money. You'd essentially be operating as an assasin even though you don't have the class.
Unfamiliar with any guidelines preventing this. But we are associating killing for no reason other than money with a standard evil alignment. And that's a whole ball of wax we shouldn't discuss (see real world mercenary groups like Blackwater). Let's not have that discussion again, please.
So perhaps a better question is: can you have profession: asoweghf? can you make day job checks with such a profession? Since the skill states that the list presented is not finite, you should be able to expand on it. Why not make up some random profession that doesn't exist? I have profession: qwertyologist! I study the science behind the rare qwerty particle!
Sure, I'll never be able to use it in a game. But for RP reasons, it's not offending anyone, it's not anything really, so what's the big deal? Why can't I make day job checks with it?
If that's permissible, then allowing assassin is permissible, provided that the players description of what his profession: assassin entails isn't inherently evil. Perhaps he belongs to an assassin's guild that helps keep the world in balance, one kill at a time, like Wanted (terrible movie by the way, I don't recommend it). As long as he doesn't say he goes around butchering orphans or doing things like the character in Chris's story -- what's the problem?
|
Hmmm. I would have to say I would be okay with Profession: Assassin so long as the player doesn't ever go into specifics as to how he earns his money. Just because their profession is Assassin doesn't mean they are killing people, maybe they are the Information Gathering Specialist in their Assassin Cell, a maximum 150g seems really low to kill anyone. Same goes for any profession not overwhelmingly evil.
I do however believe people should be held responsible for their dayjobs. If you have Profession: Thief as a Paladin or worshiper of Abadar and roll dayjob check; you need to get an atonement spell since you obviously have participated in something that breaks the Law and have fallen out of favor.
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
..., there is absolutely nothing that says Profession (assassin) is evil. That's your subjective decision on that without taking a look at the actual actions of the character. Since day job actions are not adjudicated, and its a roll of the dice, you have no business adjudicating "off screen" actions as evil or not.
This isn't a home game.
And may I remind you, many in game faction missions require assassination. So you can't sit there and say that all precedence leads to assassination being evil.
Hi, Andrew. This is a seperate issue than the concern I had above.
Let me take your last point first. We've been assured that faction missions can get as evil as they please, and that does not reflect on the PCs. In Pathfinder Society, "I was only following orders" is indeed a legitimate defense. Saying that Major Maldriss sends his minions out to kill people, and that therefore it's okay, is explicitly not true. Faction missions get a pass. Freely-chosen day jobs don't.
And, there was recently the case of a scenario in which the PCs following a faction mission could receive an "evil cookie" pulling them one step towards an evil alignment unless they received an atonement. What was this terrible act, so much worse than any other faction assignment? Blasphemy? Sacrificing innocent souls? Cutting out someone's tongue? No, Andrew: it was assassination.
If you don't think that killing people for money is all that bad, you have to address that situation and explain why the campaign coordinators believe that a single assassination is enough to require penance. And, if the PC in question is a neutral character who doesn't have enough money or prestige for an atonement, it's enough to register him as unplayable.
I'm trying to find prestige classes that require an evil alignment. Assassin, Red Mantis Assassin. What else? Anti-paladin. Agent of the Grave. Demoniac. Soul Eater. Umbral Agent. Maybe a couple more, but you get the idea. (Even Diabolists, Pain Tasters, and Guild Poisoners can be Neutral. Assassins are worse than that,)
You are free to disagree, Andrew, but it seems reasonable to me that the Golarion campaign world views assassination -- the activity, not just the prestige class -- as just as evil as service to dark gods. I'm going to read that as an intentional choice by James Jacobs and the other people resonsible for the setting.
And really, isn't that the OP's point? If he wanted to get some extra coin as a sellsword, as an agent for the Bellflower Network, as a bodyguard or as a mob enforcer, he'd have said so. Nobody puts ranks in Profession (assassin) who doesn't want to be dark and edgy. Well, for some of us, that choice falls on the other side of the edge. If you push the envelope, sometimes the envelop pushes back.
Again, I'm willing to compromise and allow it with an atonement.
|
|
..., there is absolutely nothing that says Profession (assassin) is evil. That's your subjective decision on that without taking a look at the actual actions of the character. Since day job actions are not adjudicated, and its a roll of the dice, you have no business adjudicating "off screen" actions as evil or not.
This isn't a home game.
And may I remind you, many in game faction missions require assassination. So you can't sit there and say that all precedence leads to assassination being evil.
Hi, Andrew. This is a seperate issue than the concern I had above.
Let me take your last point first. We've been assured that faction missions can get as evil as they please, and that does not reflect on the PCs. In Pathfinder Society, "I was only following orders" is indeed a legitimate defense. Saying that Major Maldriss sends his minions out to kill people, and that therefore it's okay, is explicitly not true. Faction missions get a pass. Freely-chosen day jobs don't.
And, there was recently the case of a scenario in which the PCs following a faction mission could receive an "evil cookie" pulling them one step towards an evil alignment unless they received an atonement. What was this terrible act, so much worse than any other faction assignment? Blasphemy? Sacrificing innocent souls? Cutting out someone's tongue? No, Andrew: it was assassination.
If you don't think that killing people for money is all that bad, you have to address that situation and explain why the campaign coordinators believe that a single assassination is enough to require penance. And, if the PC in question is a neutral character who doesn't have enough money or prestige for an atonement, it's enough to register him as unplayable.
I'm trying to find prestige classes that require an evil alignment. Assassin, Red Mantis Assassin. What else? Anti-paladin. Agent of the Grave. Demoniac. Soul Eater. Umbral Agent. Maybe a couple more, but you get the idea. (Even...
Chris,
I think you are a fantastic GM. I have intense respect for both the way you GM, and the fact you are as prolific as you are. I have enjoyed every session I've sat at your table. 9 times out of 10, I'd agree with you on aspects of following the rules and such.
But in this case, I think you are overstepping.
|
|
Again, i ask the question. Why is there a vanity that lets you join an assassins guild if its evil to be an assassin? The group doesnt do bake sales, they kill people for money. But thats okay because its just 4pp and is handled off screen.
So what is it. Is it evil to have profession assassin and not evil to join an assassins guild? Both evil? Neither evil? If both are evil, then i guess they shouldnt have added the vanity to the field guide.
|
|
Ok, this looks like a challange (in good humor). Can I picture a Lawful thief? Sure. I only steal cattle from the orcs in the country over the hill. Or I'm a "licensed thief" in one culture - I've read several Sci-F novels that address this type of character.
.
Or even better - a PC who is Cheliaxian, and is a Paladin that specializes in stealing slaves and smuggleing them out of the country to Andoran. Paladin-Thief. Heck, I could even have both classes right? L/G Rogue/Paladin of Abadar.... tempting me, but I already have 10 PCs and don't need another.
Stealing cattle from orcs is still stealing; the assumed alignment of the creature you are stealing from does not come into play when deciding if an action is morally correct. Only stealing from evil creatures is still stealing. When it comes to the grounds of a 'licensed thief' from one culture stealing from another it's no different. Stealing is Stealing, just because your government/culture chooses not to prosecute you for the crime you committed does not mean you have not committed a crime.
In your example the Paladin has committed a crime in Chelaxia but Andoran chooses not to enforce the crime because they have no jurisdiction in Chelaxia. A crime was still committed because the Paladin stole the property of another person. The legal action would have been to buy the slaves and set them free.
|
|
Ok, this looks like a challange (in good humor). Can I picture a Lawful thief? Sure. I only steal cattle from the orcs in the country over the hill. Or I'm a "licensed thief" in one culture - I've read several Sci-F novels that address this type of character.
.
Or even better - a PC who is Cheliaxian, and is a Paladin that specializes in stealing slaves and smuggleing them out of the country to Andoran. Paladin-Thief. Heck, I could even have both classes right? L/G Rogue/Paladin of Abadar.... tempting me, but I already have 10 PCs and don't need another.Stealing cattle from orcs is still stealing; the assumed alignment of the creature you are stealing from does not come into play when deciding if an action is morally correct. Only stealing from evil creatures is still stealing. When it comes to the grounds of a 'licensed thief' from one culture stealing from another it's no different. Stealing is Stealing, just because your government/culture chooses not to prosecute you for the crime you committed does not mean you have not committed a crime.
In your example the Paladin has committed a crime in Chelaxia but Andoran chooses not to enforce the crime because they have no jurisdiction in Chelaxia. A crime was still committed because the Paladin stole the property of another person. The legal action would have been to buy the slaves and set them free.
Eh, not sure I agree 100% here.
Privateers were basically sanctioned pirates. They still committed piracy, but it was not against the law, as they were sanctioned. Although one country’s privateer was another’s pirate, and so on.
Pathfinders are for all intents and purposes , tomb robbers and thieves of local and sometimes indigenous artifacts; murderers of those that get in their way. Simply being a Pathfinder should be enough for a Paladin to have to atone on a regular basis. But we basically hand-wave that. The adherence to the Paladin Code and to the tenants of their Deity are granular to specific actions, and not the over-arching theme of the campaign.
As such, just like all other alignment based PFS-specific rulings, Paladins are held to a higher standard. So yeah, a day job choice, in my mind, could affect your Paladin-hood, and an atonement might be necessary. But that’s because they are a Paladin.
But a <whatever> Neutral character, who wanted Profession (assassin), does not have a specific moral code to which they must adhere. We don’t have a granularity of what the exact actions committed by the Professional assassin in this case, so we have no bearing to determine whether they are really evil or not. I’ve seen holy LG assassins whose jobs are to assassinate undead as part of fantasy literature.
You don’t know what types of contracts this guy takes out. All you know is “Profession (assassin)” and I don’t think we have the right to adjudicate “off-screen” actions that we have no knowledge of what they actually are.
This is hugely different from “Profession (sacrifice children)” which specifies a specific granular evil act.
|
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 16
|
I think it's worth noting that the Assassin prestige class has a RP requirement of killing someone for no other reason than to qualify to be an assassin. So while I think a non-evil character could make a living as an assassin by killing only people who deserve it, the prestige class is evil because they must have killed someone without such a justification.
|
|
This is an interesting outlook - somewhat at odds with the game we play. All the items on our chronicles are "Stolen" from someone - often after the owner has been killed (murder?) - so then the buying of these items would be buying stolen goods. But that is ok, as the money used to "buy" them is gained by the selling of them and other items gained in the same way.
.
What is lawful in one location/culture is not lawful in another. "Stealing" is taking something from someone that they normally don't want to give up. This could easily be (and sometimes is) Lawful. (Taxes come to mind.)...
I'm not debating the fact that pathfinders are actually murderers and thieves. Just that if a Paladin steals something in a country that has laws against stealing he has broken the law in that country and may have to face some alignment/code of conduct/atonement issues.
Stealing is actually defined as taking another person's property without permission or legal right and without intending to return it to that person upon their request. Sadly most taxes are legal.
It's complicated for the discussion of can a Paladin steal, which is thread derail from the OP question. I'm gonna end it here cause I'm bored of discussing it.
|
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 8
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There are times when I read threads and think: "awesome, time for some engaging and thought provoking discussion!"
Then there are times when I read some posts and sigh, because we're back at that dead horse, whacking it a few more times to make sure it can't possibly get back up.
This is the latter.
We've gone over the good/evil & taking life bit since before Pathfinder, Dungeons and Dragons. It's been talked about since before we were all born. It isn't going to be solved. Ever. That's why people still argue about going to war and debate capital punishment. It's always a bad discussion to have because we're all passionate about it in one respect or another, and honestly is one that shouldn't be in a PFS forum.
I understand that it happens when we're talking about paladins. I understand it rearing up when we're talking about faction missions, or actual scenario missions, or even character decisions during a game. But why, why are we talking about it when it's the flavor of someone's character and nothing more?
EDITED, more rant ahead.
He has a skill that says it's his job. It's not an offensive word, only what he tells me about it could make it offensive or not. If he describes things that are sadistic, racist, or sexist, then we have an issue. If he describes himself as a basic Altair clone, then were's the problem? Really?
He gets 10 gold at the end of a game. He sacrificed skill points for flavor. I will not punish that.
TLDR: If he kills hobos, we have a problem. If he doesn't kill hobos, we don't.