|
So it sounds like the best answers is that the GM can hang PC removal over someone's head. So they can force the day job roll to not happen it sounds like. On a GM by GM basis, since the bylaws overrule VC fiat rulings on the subject. The GM is final authority, not the VC.
It does not seem like it is legal to toss this PC from the table, however, just for having profession: torturer. Just enforce GM fiat rulings on the day job roll as per the bylaws.
The GM may rule an alignment shift, but only after warning the player and giving him a clear choice (no "gotchas"—see previous quotation). And the GM can certainly warn the player about the possibility of having the character removed from play for persistently evil behavior.
But the GM does not adjudicate whether the character has become "wantonly evil" and is to be removed from play, she only refers the matter to the VCs for ruling. The relevant text:
Characters who become wantonly evil, whose actions are deliberate and without motive or provocation, are retired from the campaign. This measure is a last resort; there is more than one way to play a given alignment.
If a character has become wantonly evil as defined above, the GM should escalate the report to the convention coordinator, or the local Venture-Captain or Venture-Lieutenant. If they agree with the GM, then the character is deemed wantonly evil and considered removed from the campaign. Again, these measures should be taken as a very last resort.
In the event of a wantonly evil character, record the character as "Dead," and the person who enters the tracking sheet should check that box as well. If the convention coordinator, Venture-Captain, or Venture-Lieutenant decides the character fits the criteria for being wantonly evil, she will then email the campaign coordinator to advise him of the situation, including the player's name, Pathfinder Society Number, character name, and email address. She will advise the player of these actions and offer the player the campaign coordinator's email address so the player may present his case.
The Campaign Coordinator will present all facts to the Venture-Captains and Venture-Lieutenants at large with all the names (both player and character) removed. If the majority of Venture-Captains and Venture-Lieutenants feel that the act was wantonly evil and the character is irrevocably evil, then character [sic] will remain removed from the campaign. If the majority feel the character should be able to atone for his actions, the campaign coordinator will contact the player and advise him of such. The email may be printed and taken to the next game session so the GM may adjudicate the atonement and document it on the Chronicle sheet of the that [sic] game.
|
I'm still waiting for someone to explain why when the guy in charge of the entire campaign declared that torture is evil, he somehow only meant it part of the time.
I guess the question then is how many evil acts until an alignment shift? Back to GM fiat, then. If it's one evil act with 25 separate GMs, it's probably going under the radar.
|
|
David, that's why we should always read through the Chronicle sheets.
Really? Chronicle sheets for 4-7 players in time slots that are barely long enough for the scenarios? Maybe if they make Pathfinder slots 6-7 hours instead of 4-5. Again, with all the CN nutiness I've seen, I'm not inclined to crack down on this.
|
You could also just word it differently and take Profession (Interrogator). Would probably get a much less visceral reaction, and isn't necessarily something that would automatically be an evil act.
This is what I'd do.
Many people consider interrogation torture, but an adversarial interview at the local police station is also an interrogation that is supposed to include no torture.
|
|
David, that's why we should always read through the Chronicle sheets.Really? Chronicle sheets for 4-7 players in time slots that are barely long enough for the scenarios? Maybe if they make Pathfinder slots 6-7 hours instead of 4-5. Again, with all the CN nutiness I've seen, I'm not inclined to crack down on this.
I don't see a ton of CN (I'm being evil) stuff in the Twin Cities. Not saying it doesn't happen here, just not typically at the tables I run.
So when I do see it, I'm only checking one players chronicles. Paging through even 33, looking for alignment infraction notes takes about 30 seconds.
I typically use the 3 strikes and you're out rule for an alignment shift.
Good to neutral and then again for neutral to evil.
Unless the act is incredibly heinous.
But each GM definitely has the right to define evil at their table.
|
So, I throw a "pretty" cloak over my torturous actions and call it interrogation? Seems just as morally ambiguous.
How about the use of the "confess" spell? Seems like window dressing on an "enhanced" interrogation technique to me that they intentionally gave to a paladin archetype (Oath of Vengeance).
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
As a Crusader of Achaekek and Member of the Red Mantis Guild, what I do outside my missions is my own perogative. Will I kill for the Decemvirate? Yes, they pay well. Will I kill for He who Walks in Blood? Yes, for the same reason and more. Does it make me evil to take payment for murder from one source, but not another? Tis a sacred bond that Mistress Jakalyn has entrusted upon me. Who are you to judge, when you kill for reasons not known to you?
|
|
(My takeaway from all this: It seems like the best solution for the campaign would be as suggested upthread: limit craft and profession skills to those explicitly listed in the CRB. That way it's not whack-a-mole with each particular ambiguous-to-evil idea that may come up.)
Even though I brought it up up thread, I'd hate for this to be a solution. Because there are many,many more than 31 creative options that come nowhere close to evil.
The whack-a-mole process, I feel, can actually help dissuade riding the line so closely that table variation might apply.
|
Global Organized Play Coordinator
|
| 20 people marked this as a favorite. |
Since folks seem to want to force the issue, or be argumentative about it, I will go ahead and clarify that Profession (Torturer) is specifically illegal. There are thousands of other options to choose from. If you desperately need to play only a Profession (torturer) character, save it for a home game. And yes, I will add it to the FAQ since I am sure that is the next question that will come up.
|
Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento
|
I'm still waiting for someone to explain why when the guy in charge of the entire campaign declared that torture is evil, he somehow only meant it part of the time.I guess the question then is how many evil acts until an alignment shift? Back to GM fiat, then. If it's one evil act with 25 separate GMs, it's probably going under the radar.
Well, I don't know how it works where you are. At the shop I organize, GM's talk to each other. We also talk to our VL and VC. So if I do note an alignment shift, (which so far I have thankfully not had to do) I send that fact to my VL, along with my impression of the circumstances, so that he can take the appropriate action.
Then *he* has to deal with the decision of whether the character is removed from play.
(David, you have *read* the section of the guide that talks about evil acts, right? because you seem to have a lot of misinformation about that process and the GM's role in it.)
|
Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Since folks seem to want to force the issue, or be argumentative about it, I will go ahead and clarify that Profession (Torturer) is specifically illegal. There are thousands of other options to choose from. If you desperately need to play only a Profession (torturer) character, save it for a home game. And yes, I will add it to the FAQ since I am sure that is the next question that will come up.
I am so sad that that had to be done.
|
Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento
|
Side note. Mike Brock has just definitively (if inadvertantly) answered the question of whether only the 32 listed professions are legal for PFS play.
I will go ahead and clarify that Profession (Torturer) is specifically illegal. There are thousands of other options to choose from.
note: Thousands of options. Not 32.
|
Global Organized Play Coordinator
|
| 14 people marked this as a favorite. |
Side note. Mike Brock has just definitively (if inadvertantly) answered the question of whether only the 32 listed professions are legal for PFS play.I will go ahead and clarify that Profession (Torturer) is specifically illegal. There are thousands of other options to choose from.note: Thousands of options. Not 32.
It wasn't inadvertent.
|
|
Since folks seem to want to force the issue, or be argumentative about it, I will go ahead and clarify that Profession (Torturer) is specifically illegal. There are thousands of other options to choose from. If you desperately need to play only a Profession (torturer) character, save it for a home game. And yes, I will add it to the FAQ since I am sure that is the next question that will come up.
Mike,
Thanks for ruling. I wish it didn't have to come to that. It's sad when options are removed from play. Now where does this leave my ex-torturer and his now ill gotten gains?
|
Global Organized Play Coordinator
|
Since folks seem to want to force the issue, or be argumentative about it, I will go ahead and clarify that Profession (Torturer) is specifically illegal. There are thousands of other options to choose from. If you desperately need to play only a Profession (torturer) character, save it for a home game. And yes, I will add it to the FAQ since I am sure that is the next question that will come up.Mike,
Thanks for ruling. I wish it didn't have to come to that. It's sad when options are removed from play. Now where does this leave my ex-torturer and his now ill gotten gains?
Choose a different profession. Since he is an ex-torturer, and no longer torturing, he isn't making money from it. What do you envision your character doing that is making money now?
|
Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento
|
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
Since he is an ex-torturer, and no longer torturing, he isn't making money from it. What do you envision your character doing that is making money now?Conducting tax audits?
We have a local tax collector / Cleric of Pharasma.
He feels that he is unavoidable.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Since he is an ex-torturer, and no longer torturing, he isn't making money from it. What do you envision your character doing that is making money now?Conducting tax audits?We have a local tax collector / Cleric of Pharasma.
He feels that he is unavoidable.
That's awesome. Pure win.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I am surprised at the civility in this thread. Well done everyone.
There is a player locally with Profession: Auditor. He is an Inquisitor of Asmodeus.
Never let it be said that torturers lack civility. In all seriousness, if players would play with the level of maturity exhibited on this discussion thread, there would be a far less need to restrict things.
|
|
This kind of issue comes up a lot in RPG games in general. For example, in Vampire: the Masquerade, most people wanted to be the sadistic Sabbat faction, not the more low-key Camarilla faction. I guess this is an example of: Evil is Cooler
|
Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento
|
Bah. Malkavian, cause rules are for suckers and sane people.
(Okay, my characters never did live long, usually got killed by the other players. But I did get at least one ST to scrap his plot because watching the other players chasing my character around his mental whirly gig was more fun.)
|
|
Quite late to the game here, but I'm surprised nobody thought of non-lethal means of torture.
"You torture people for a living? How is that not evil?"
"Feathers. I tickle them to insanity. Also itching powder. Lots of itching powder. We also play Muzak 24/7."
Of course, you're still causing pain (or at least mental distress) so it's probably just as evil as more practical versions of torture. Regardless, Mike has settled the matter for all of us. :)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's hard for me to really judge, as there are plenty of evil PCs in the Society, all with "CN" written on their character sheets. As long as those PCs are legal, I don't see what difference this makes. PFS condones PCs getting away with whatever as long as they have "CN" on their sheet.
That's not fair. There's also plenty of Chelaxians with LN on their sheet. An Bones Oracles with N on their sheet.
(Not trying to pick on anyone. It just bothers me when people treat CN as closer to Evil than any other neutral alignment, or for that matter, CG as 'less good' than LG. Chaos is not Evil's little brother.)
|
Venture-Lieutenant, Florida—Melbourne
|
Quite late to the game here, but I'm surprised nobody thought of non-lethal means of torture.
"You torture people for a living? How is that not evil?"
"Feathers. I tickle them to insanity. Also itching powder. Lots of itching powder. We also play Muzak 24/7."
Of course, you're still causing pain (or at least mental distress) so it's probably just as evil as more practical versions of torture. Regardless, Mike has settled the matter for all of us. :)
Bring it...the comfy chair!
Because no one expects the Spanish Inquisition.
|
|
It's hard for me to really judge, as there are plenty of evil PCs in the Society, all with "CN" written on their character sheets. As long as those PCs are legal, I don't see what difference this makes. PFS condones PCs getting away with whatever as long as they have "CN" on their sheet.That's not fair. There's also plenty of Chelaxians with LN on their sheet. An Bones Oracles with N on their sheet.
(Not trying to pick on anyone. It just bothers me when people treat CN as closer to Evil than any other neutral alignment, or for that matter, CG as 'less good' than LG. Chaos is not Evil's little brother.)
Well to defend this arguement I have heard many times that "CN lets you be evil or good when you see fit"
This is just people that want to play evil so bad they believe that quote above.
I do not think I ever had a conflicting debate with alignment with someone that actually read the actual alignment parts in the book.
I think it is sad people fight so strongly for something like this. There is an argument that is is out of the game so it does nto matter. Well then why does it matter to them they have it.
Plus the society wants to maintain a positive image. Why would they allow a known torturer to soil their name and represent them.
|
|
Technically, LN and NN also let you be good or evil when you feel like it. It's just that if you feel like it too often, your alignment changes. (For that matter, this is true of every alignment.)
There definate differences between good, evil, and nuetral. Nuetral does not mean you good/evil bipolar.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Not really wanting to turn this into an alignment argument.
But just because you are XXX Neutral does not mean you get to be good or evil when you feel like it.
Each of the alignments has a basic morality tied to that alignment. Acting within that morality set is what constitutes being that alignment.
There really isn't a conscious choice of "I'm going to do evil now, because I feel like it and its ok because I'm neutral."
You do what you do within the morality set, because that's who you are.
|
Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
My point was that your alignment should be determined by your actions, not the other way around. Other than certain spells, your alignment never says you can't do that, you are X. All it ever says is if you do that, you won't be X any longer. (Or really in most cases, "You know, you have been doing Y an awful lot recently, and you haven't really been doing Z for a while, are you sure you are still X?)
So if CN characters are saying "we are CN, we can do good or evil whenever we want!" then yes, that's true, but if they then always follow it up by doing evil, maybe they aren't CN characters.