Aasimar paladin / sorcerer, infernal bloodline, infernal healing, corrupting touch+smite

[Sanjiv]

Lots of small questions.
> Can an aasimar be a sorcerer with an infernal bloodline?
> Can non infernal sorcerers learn infernal healing?
> Can smite be used on an individual who was made to detect evil via a corrupting touch? How long will that smite last?

From a RP perspective, that one may so easily 'change the polarity' of one's aura is a humble reminder that mortals can choose to be good or evil, and must constantly make this choice.

I'm thinking about this for a PFS Andoran character.

[I'm Hiding In Your Closet]

Sanjiv wrote:

> Can an aasimar be a sorcerer with an infernal bloodline?

Yes - it just means you have a rather remarkable family tree. We know angels can fall and devils can rise....

Sanjiv wrote:

> Can non infernal sorcerers learn infernal healing?

Any Sorcerer (barring some variant that has yet to exist) can potentially learn infernal healing. My Martyred Bloodline Sorcerer learned it at his most recent level - he's a renegade Razmiran Priest, so it fits.

Sanjiv wrote:

Can smite be used on an individual who was made to detect evil via a corrupting touch? How long will that smite last?

No. Corrupting Touch and infernal healing may temporarily taint you with Evil enough to make you LOOK "Evil," but that in no way means you actually ARE Evil, and a Paladin's Smite Evil ability only works on those who are ACTUALLY Evil. It makes sense, doesn't it? "You may fool a Paladin's eyes, yet you may never deceive their sword." Think about it: Part of a Paladin's ethos is a more rigid and old-fashioned version of Superman's - TRUTH AND JUSTICE! There's absolutely no justice or truth in 'tagging' a non-Evil creature with just a little bit of superficial Evil, then "punishing them for a crime they didn't commit." If I were DMing a game where a player tried to do that, I'd declare them "fallen Paladin" the first time they tried it - and I think a DM could even do that in Pathfinder Society.

On the other hand, it's a great TRAP for villainous Infernal Sorcerers to lay for Paladins, forcing an unwitting (though no doubt redeemable) fall by making them kill someone who didn't actually deserve it - I've heard complaints at times about Paladins "overusing" their Detect Evil ability, and this would be a very nasty and effective form of cognitive-behavioral therapy to apply to a Paladin PC who's judged to be too dependent on it.

I won't say it's not kind of a cute idea, though - it certainly earned my attention!

[Berselius]

Quote:

Can an Aasimar be a sorcerer with an infernal bloodline?

Welp there's nothing in the rules that says he CAN'T but considering it's kind of a contradiction I'd expect at least a damn good back story (maybe the Aasimar's ancestor was a Risen Devil?). I'd allow it but if the Aasimar has levels in Paladin already then I'd rule as soon as he took levels in the that particular Sorcerer's bloodline he'd pretty much be an ex-paladin as soon as he used one of the bloodline's more vile abilities (corrupting touch etc etc). I know nothing in the rules says that he'll violate code of conduct with a sorcerer's abilities but I'd still rule that it does. Paladins should not corrupt; that's an antipaladin's job! As soon as he made use of this power he either retrains to be an antipaladin (or another class altogther) and until then he's stuck with class level of ex-paladin.

Quote:

Can non infernal sorcerers learn infernal healing?

You mean like the spell (the one that involved you drinking a drop of devil's blood)? I dunno but if the character is good in alignment and willing partakes a spell like that then I'd personally slap him or her with a huge exp penalty (for not playing your PC right). Also, depending on his class, he might be up for code of conduct violation.

Quote:

Can smite be used on an individual who was made to detect evil via a corrupting touch? How long will that smite last?

Good question. I honestly have no idea. If the ability doesn't alter the affected being's alignment in anyway then I'd personally say no (unless the ability specifically says the affected being can be smitten). I'm guessing you might have a player who wants to multiclass as a Paladin / Sorcerer (Infernal Bloodline) and said player is looking for loopholes to make the class combo work? I'd say it'd be a bad idea to be honest.

[Blakmane]

Urgh. The reply above mine makes me sad.

1) yes, there's no limitation. A tiefling can be a paladin just the same. I'd probably slap someone who tried to tell me I instantly fall because of my heritage.

2) Technically yes, you can learn and cast the spell just fine. Infernal healing has the [evil] descriptor however, and it would be a fair call for your DM to tell you using it counts as an evil act.

3) No. The recipient detects as evil but this doesn't make them count as evil for any other effect. Smite doesn't target auras, it targets innate alignment or subtype. It's also a pretty big abuse of the paladin code.

As an aside:

-Smiting a foe who detects as evil would not make you fall - the smite would fail anyway so you'd know something was up. Killing someone purely because they are evil is different, and pretty iffy to begin with (and you may be looking at penance or at least a talking to from the DM), but you can't fall because of something you didn't know. This is DM dickery at the highest level and probably means they have the 'punish players for things I don't like' mindset (one would usually avoid these DMs).

-"a huge exp penalty (for not playing your PC right)"

Noone but you gets to decide whether you are 'playing your PC right'.

That said, I probably wouldn't mess around with this combo unless your DM is totally on-board with the concept. Paladins already walk a fine line in terms of conduct and many DMs like to plunge them straight into the abyss at the slightest opportunity. At risk of being rude, I think this is straight up bad DMing and falling paladins should never be done outside of behaviour strong enough to warrant an alignment switch/with the player's consent... but I'm not your DM so I can't promise you'll get such an easy run. As this is for PFS and you may have multiple DMs you don't know that well, it's probably too risky.

[Sanjiv]

I didn't think smiting an artificially evil entity would work(or should be allowed), but I did try and consider circumstances in which it'd be appropriate. The only context I came up with was in the case of "the greater evil." The same way that Paladins can do bad things (lie, cheat, steal) for "the greater good," it seems like they should be able to identify the things which supported 'the greater evil,' and act against those things. In the same way that detecting as evil isn't enough to justify being smitten, maybe not detecting as evil shouldn't be enough to save one from being smitten?

At least in terms of lore. Mechanically and in terms of game balance, I understand why putting alignment restrictions on smite makes sense. Then again, corrupting touch and infernal healing have the mechanical effect of making one detect as evil. Those alignment alterations come with mechanical costs and benefits, right? I.e. protection from good, or protection from evil? How would detecting as evil apply to Smite RAW? And would casting infernal healing on one's self allow one to register as evil for the sake of overcoming DR or anti-good barriers?

Speaking of which, is the negative aura from infernal healing negated by paladins? Or do paladins detect as evil with an aura the strength of one? or of that of their paladin level?

[Cap. Darling]

I Think you Will have to expect table variation on paladin and infernal healing. Some folks Think that Casting a [Evil] spell is doing evil.

[insaneogeddon]

RAW the descriptor means exactly that even RAI. [Shadow] draws on shadow and such spells are made of its substance. The [evil] spell draws on evil entities and powers and are made of its substance (in-case the 'infernal' bit wasn't a hint).

In dnd evil is a TANGIBLE THING SEPARATE FROM CHOICE OR MORALITY - think of it like in this world electromagnetic or gravity so lies good and evil in dnd.

Nevermind paladins 'embody the teachings of the virtuous deities they serve'
and said virtuous deities have this little rule they force on all their clerics:
'Chaotic, Evil, Good, and Lawful Spells: 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.'

[Captain K.]

Aasimar Paladin Sorcerer?

Be a Dragon Disciple!

Paladin 2/Sorc 3/DD 7

Silver Dragon heritage (because silver dragons are Paladins to begin with). Angel Aasimar (you get good stats and Alter Self. Turn in to a silvery Lizardfolk!) Be a Paladin of Apsu (Lawful Good Dragon god)

By PFS level 12 you *are* a Silver Dragon by most criteria and you are still a Sorcerer and Paladin.

[Sanjiv]

I love that idea!

insaneogeddon wrote:

... said virtuous deities have this little rule they force on all their clerics:

... 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.'

I thought this meant that they were incapable of it, not that they weren't allowed to.

Can good Clerics dual-classed with arcane spell casters not cast infernal healing?

['Sani]

If they follow a good god, no, they can't.

"Chaotic, Evil, Good, and Lawful Spells: 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."

The rule doesn't say they can't cast cleric spells, or divine spells, its a flat out NO SPELLS of opposed alignment.

[Mojorat]

Class descriptions are always written. As if that class was the only one.

So mechanicay a cleric of serenrae 3/sorc 1 can physically case evil spells. They may not have cleric spells after however (not sure pfs rules on this)

For a paladin / sorc if infernal healing hasn't had its.evil descriptor removed no more paladin powers. Unlike my cleric opinion opinion above I think the rules on this are clearer. (Pfs may have a house rule for this I'm not aware of)

[LazarX]

'Sani wrote:

If they follow a good god, no, they can't.

"Chaotic, Evil, Good, and Lawful Spells: 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."

The rule doesn't say they can't cast cleric spells, or divine spells, its a flat out NO SPELLS of opposed alignment.

This means the spell is absolutely off limits to good aligned Mystic Theurges.

[Akerlof]

'Sani wrote:

If they follow a good god, no, they can't.

"Chaotic, Evil, Good, and Lawful Spells: 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."

The rule doesn't say they can't cast cleric spells, or divine spells, its a flat out NO SPELLS of opposed alignment.

That's a pretty aggressive reading of a rule buried within a class description without any reference to multiclassing or prestige classes.

Also, take it in the context of the Spells section of the Cleric rules:

Spells wrote:

Spells: A cleric casts divine spells which are drawn from the cleric spell list presented in Spell Lists. Her alignment, however, may restrict her from casting certain spells opposed to her moral or ethical beliefs; see chaotic, evil, good, and lawful spells. A cleric must choose and prepare her spells in advance.

This is very specifically referencing which spells from the Cleric spell list a Cleric may cast as a Cleric. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and say it could be conceived as a gray area, but context in this case lends more to talking about divine spells granted by a Cleric's deity as a feature of the Cleric class.

If we were to read the entire Cleric section of the rulebook as strictly as you read this one section, there would be no Cleric multiclasses with any other spellcaster except maybe Paladin and Inquisitor. After all, "A cleric casts divine spells which are drawn from the cleric spell list..." is "a flat out NO SPELLS" from Arcane or Druid lists.

However, if a Cleric who also happens to get spells from another source chooses to cast a spell of an opposing alignment, they still have to deal with the repercussions of their deity. It's certainly reasonable that a good Cleric will lose their powers for committing an evil act by casting an [evil] spell. That doesn't mean a Cleric/Wizard Mystic Theurge couldn't memorize Infernal Healing or Create Undead in a Wizard slot, it just means that it's a Really Bad Idea to do so.

<edit>
Also, if you look in the Magic section, there's a good reason that Clerics wouldn't be able to cast Cleric spells from an opposing alignment that doesn't apply to spells of another source:

Divine Spells wrote:

Divine Spells
Clerics, druids, experienced paladins, and experienced rangers can cast divine spells. Unlike arcane spells, divine spells draw power from a divine source. Clerics gain spell power from deities or from divine forces. The divine force of nature powers druid and ranger spells, and the divine forces of law and good power paladin spells. Divine spells tend to focus on healing and protection and are less flashy, destructive, and disruptive than arcane spells.

It's natural that a deity will not provide an opposing alignment spell to one of their Clerics. That doesn't have any impact on spells from other sources for different classes on the character, though.

</edit>

[Sanjiv]

Mojorat wrote:

For a paladin / sorc if infernal healing hasn't had its.evil descriptor removed no more paladin powers.

"A paladin who (1) ceases to be lawful good, (2) who willfully commits an evil act, or (3) who violates the code of conduct loses all paladin spells and class features"

Lawful Good
The wording of the atonement spell suggests that a person's alignment cannot be suddenly changed by other, single and isolated acts. Therefore it doesn't seem that being the subject of infernal healing, or casting it, would result in a sudden alignment change.

Unless 'detecting' as a non 'lawful good' alignment would be enough for a paladin to fall. In this case, it seems that infernal healing would be a good offensive spell against good aligned paladins.

"Note: Normally, changing alignment is up to the player. This use of atonement offers a method for a character to change his or her alignment drastically, suddenly, and definitively."

Code of Conduct
Using an evil spell seems like it could be considered 'not acting with honor.' Or even not respecting legitimate authority, which probably looks down on using devil's blood. I could totally accept that using Infernal Healing goes against the paladin code of conduct.

"Code of Conduct: A paladin must be of lawful good alignment and loses all class features except proficiencies if she ever willingly commits an evil act.

Additionally, a paladin's code requires that she respect legitimate authority, act with honor (not lying, not cheating, not using poison, and so forth), help those in need (provided they do not use the help for evil or chaotic ends), and punish those who harm or threaten innocents."

Evil Acts
I'm not sure how casting infernal healing actually is an evil act. Then again, maybe there are some hidden, evil costs that have yet to make themselves obvious?

"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."

---

Even if the situation is perfectly clear (that Infernal Healing makes paladins fall), it's also clear that infernal healing is such a useful spell that good people are being seduced into bending the rules around it.

Doesn't that indicate that an official ruling is necessary? I'm surprised it doesn't already exist.

[Mojorat]

Ugh it has the evil descriptor it is by raw evil. Wether you feel it should be or not is a wholly (or unwholly) diffferent matter. In PFS a palasin casting infernal healing looses his powers. Unless PFS has a house rule I'm not aware of regarding spell descriptors.

Just to be clear nothing in the game me hanics stops a multiclass cleric/paladin from casting spells opposed to their God's alignmen with their other classes list.

[Navarion]

While reading this thread I got a strange idea (because the same rules ruined a concept for a gestalt I had, a Tiefling paladin/sorcerer gestalt with the abyssal bloodline who uses his "Added Summonings" ability to summon demons and forces them to help him). How would it be to address those issues through the trait system by adding special dispensations that add small exceptions like "You are allowed to cast healing spells with the [evil] descriptor", "You are allowed to cast summon monster spells with the [evil] descriptor" or "You are allowed to lie" (for undercover paladins)? As long as you limit it to one and don't allow anything over the top like "You are allowed to kill innocents to prove your loyalty to cults you are infiltrating" it could work.