By RAW, in Golarion, is abortion evil?


Lost Omens Campaign Setting General Discussion

1 to 50 of 142 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>

Ok, so here is the logic.

1) Pharasma, the goddess of death, births, Fate, and arbiter of souls, says that Abortion is evil (an abomination). It is written in the sinner Sea Gods book.

2). Pharasma gets to judge every soul at her great Boneyard, deciding the ultimate fate and location of the soul's eternal reward.

3). As Pharasma is the judge, her...well...JUDGEMENT...is the rule, regardless of whether you follow her tenets or not.

4). Golarion has objective Good and Evil, not subjective. Pharasma knows objectively what is Good and what is Evil, so she is right.

5). Therefore, on moral judgements, we tenets are absolutely true, upheld and BACKED by the metaphysical forces of the universe.

Now, if you want to say that Pharasmsa is NOT infallible in judging souls, then you are also saying that there may be a lot of souls that got send to the wrong afterlife.

So, is this paizo's intended statement? That in Golarion, abortion is evil? Do Paladins need to treat abortion providers as murderers? Am I missing something in my logic?


5 people marked this as a favorite.

It should be noted that Pharasma is of True Neutral alignment, so the fact that such-and-such is an abomination to her does not mean that such-and-such is evil.


9 people marked this as a favorite.

Does it matter?

What kind of DM would create a situation where this matters...?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Goblin_Priest wrote:

Does it matter?

What kind of DM would create a situation where this matters...?

The kind that puts goblin babies in the village the PCs are attacking?


Bard-Sader wrote:

Ok, so here is the logic.

1) Pharasma, the goddess of death, births, Fate, and arbiter of souls, says that Abortion is evil (an abomination). It is written in the sinner Sea Gods book.

2). Pharasma gets to judge every soul at her great Boneyard, deciding the ultimate fate and location of the soul's eternal reward.

3). As Pharasma is the judge, her...well...JUDGEMENT...is the rule, regardless of whether you follow her tenets or not.

4). Golarion has objective Good and Evil, not subjective. Pharasma knows objectively what is Good and what is Evil, so she is right.

5). Therefore, on moral judgements, we tenets are absolutely true, upheld and BACKED by the metaphysical forces of the universe.

Now, if you want to say that Pharasmsa is NOT infallible in judging souls, then you are also saying that there may be a lot of souls that got send to the wrong afterlife.

So, is this paizo's intended statement? That in Golarion, abortion is evil? Do Paladins need to treat abortion providers as murderers? Am I missing something in my logic?

Another option would be that Pharasma views abortion as an abomination (meaning "counter to her holy teachings") but not actually evil (as per the objectively determinable fact of alignment).

I haven't read the passage you're citing, but presuming the word was "abomination" and not evil - the conflation of those two might not be appropriate in a world with objectively determinable morality.

A further possibility is that Gods are complicated - maybe the correct judgement of where a soul goes is based on more than just "did they do evil acts or good acts". This might just be another side effect of the unknowableness of Gods - what's written about them is a weak, fallible, mere-mortal attempt at describing something we can't really understand. With all due respect to SKR.


I wrote:
I haven't read the passage you're citing, but presuming the word was "abomination" and not evil - the conflation of those two might not be appropriate in a world with objectively determinable morality.

Actually, thinking about it again - I think this is definitely the case. In our world, "holy" is putatively "good" (side-stepping real-world religious arguments).

However, in the context of a true neutral deity - what Pharasma deems to be holy shouldn't necessarily be thought of as good, should it? Similarly, what she deems to be an abomination is not necessarily evil - it's just counter to the tenets of her true neutral religion.


Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Bear in mind this is just my rough take on the situation...

Pharasma actually gets boxed into a corner by her own purviews on this, actually.

While she is the arbiter of the final fate of a soul, she also cannot get involved. Either a thing is meant to be or a thing is not meant to be.

Therefore, while she may not like it personally, if someone is fated to either A. be aborted or B. perform one or C. get one, she has to take it at face value.

Which just goes to underscore how rough it must be to be a deity, especially one with such an encompassing portfolio...

EDIT: Other deities, though, may have serious qualms with it... or not care.

Oddly enough, Lamashtu would be VERY anti-abortion. If the mother of a child isn't strong enough to carry the child, then the mother should die so the remaining living creatures out there aren't weakened by that. If the child or the mother should die during childbirth, well, her rather cold response would be 'get strong, kid' or 'get back out there and get pregnant again, woman'.

On the other side of the token, I could see some of the Chaotic Good deities be like "Hey, choice is on the parent, good or ill."


13 people marked this as a favorite.

Let's just keep this out of the game. Honestly, this is a topic where lots of people have VERY strong, passionate beliefs on both sides. We don't need to explore everything in-game that's in real life.


10 people marked this as a favorite.

No good can come from this thread. None.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Inner Sea Gods wrote:
on the whole she believes killing the unborn is an abomination, for it sends the infant soul to the afterlife before it has a chance to fulfill its destiny.

It's says nothing else about how Pharisma regards the act. There is no good/evil or law/chaos judgement to be made, it's simply something she does not like. Honestly, given Pharisma's purview, I doubt it would make much difference in her judgements. She seems to take things in stride.


Bard-Sader wrote:

Ok, so here is the logic.

1) Pharasma, the goddess of death, births, Fate, and arbiter of souls, says that Abortion is evil (an abomination). It is written in the sinner Sea Gods book.

2). Pharasma gets to judge every soul at her great Boneyard, deciding the ultimate fate and location of the soul's eternal reward.

3). As Pharasma is the judge, her...well...JUDGEMENT...is the rule, regardless of whether you follow her tenets or not.

4). Golarion has objective Good and Evil, not subjective. Pharasma knows objectively what is Good and what is Evil, so she is right.

5). Therefore, on moral judgements, we tenets are absolutely true, upheld and BACKED by the metaphysical forces of the universe.

Now, if you want to say that Pharasmsa is NOT infallible in judging souls, then you are also saying that there may be a lot of souls that got send to the wrong afterlife.

So, is this paizo's intended statement? That in Golarion, abortion is evil? Do Paladins need to treat abortion providers as murderers? Am I missing something in my logic?

Hold on.

1. I did not see anywhere that Pharasma deems abortion evil, nor is the the ultimate arbiter of good and evil in Pathfinder/Golarion. In fact the only mention of the word abortion that appears in Inner Sea Gods is under Urgathoa on page 159. What it says regarding Pharasma and life and death is: "She makes no judgement about the justness of a particular death, and welcomes each birth with equal severity." (Page 117) So this assertion appears false. She does state that she believes it to be an abomination to kill the unborn on page 118 but good and evil are not discussed.

2. Nothing says that Pharasma gets to judge every soul. This is not what Pharasma does. Pharasma judges every soul that gets deposited in her boneyard from the river of souls that passes through the astral plane. Followers of other gods get plucked out of that by other Gods all the time in the lore. So Pharasma gets to judge those that other deities didn't get to first.

3. See number 2. She only judges those who reach her and does not judge anyone who does not.

4. Negative Pharasma has engaged in actions which are indeed evil. Its very possible that such actions are not seen as evil and she simply doesn't like it. She is a god of neutrality not of good and evil. She did not warn of Aroden's death, for example, though she could have and the death may have been avoided. Not only that but then she effectively necromancied Aroden into her undead herald so she engages in evil when she sees fit.

5. This particular subject is very much a political and ideological issue. It would make no sense for Paizo to stick their foot in that debate which could potentially alienate their customer base. There are enough players, one would assume, who believe strongly about both sides of this particular political issue that making this distinction could dis-engender them to one side or the other thus it would likely be in their best interests to simply never clarify and leave that up to a particular GM to decide.

Silver Crusade

HWalsh wrote:


Hold on.

1. I did not see anywhere that Pharasma deems abortion evil, nor is the the ultimate arbiter of good and evil in Pathfinder/Golarion. In fact the only mention of the word abortion that appears in Inner Sea Gods is under Urgathoa on page 159. What it says regarding Pharasma and life and death is: "She makes no judgement about the justness of a particular death, and welcomes each birth with equal severity." (Page 117) So this assertion appears false. She does state that she believes it to be an abomination to kill the unborn on page 118 but good and evil are not discussed.

Page 118, last full paragraph. It doesn't say anything about evil, though.


7 people marked this as a favorite.

Oh boy....this thread can't end well.


HWalsh, Are you SURE about the whole worshipper of other gods don't get judged by her thing? That'd only leave her it's atheists or something. I'm pretty sure she gets ALL souls to judge except for very unusual circumstances.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
ObligatoryHuman wrote:
Oh boy....this thread can't end well.

Potentially, but it's staying pretty on topic thus far.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Isonaroc wrote:
ObligatoryHuman wrote:
Oh boy....this thread can't end well.
Potentially, but it's staying pretty on topic thus far.

(Fingers crossed)


Bard-Sader wrote:

Ok, so here is the logic.

1) Pharasma, the goddess of death, births, Fate, and arbiter of souls, says that Abortion is evil (an abomination). It is written in the sinner Sea Gods book.

2). Pharasma gets to judge every soul at her great Boneyard, deciding the ultimate fate and location of the soul's eternal reward.

3). As Pharasma is the judge, her...well...JUDGEMENT...is the rule, regardless of whether you follow her tenets or not.

4). Golarion has objective Good and Evil, not subjective. Pharasma knows objectively what is Good and what is Evil, so she is right.

5). Therefore, on moral judgements, we tenets are absolutely true, upheld and BACKED by the metaphysical forces of the universe.

Now, if you want to say that Pharasmsa is NOT infallible in judging souls, then you are also saying that there may be a lot of souls that got send to the wrong afterlife.

So, is this paizo's intended statement? That in Golarion, abortion is evil? Do Paladins need to treat abortion providers as murderers? Am I missing something in my logic?

I would assume that all women in this universe would be judged harshly, as the number of fetuses that don't make it to term are numerous.


Hwalsh, also I don't buy the claim that Pharasma raised Aroden as an undead. Her basic core tenets are as anti-undead as it gets!


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Bard-Sader wrote:
Goblin_Priest wrote:

Does it matter?

What kind of DM would create a situation where this matters...?

The kind that puts goblin babies in the village the PCs are attacking?

Two distinct (albeit similar) scenarios.

Abortion debates are about, well, abortions. A pretty "mundane" thing, in the sense that it is an issue wholly of this world.

Goblin babies? The main argument over these kind of scenarios are not "is it ok to kill babies?", but, "are goblins inherently evil", and thus are arguments that, in my opinion, cannot in any serious way be transposed to real life. It could go into the "is leaving them to die less cruel than giving them a swift death?" domain, but it rarely does, and that's a false dilemma anyways. And while I would generally frown upon such an act by the DM (because the people I play with don't tend to hang around to debate ethics, we just want to have fun), it does contribute to the world he creates, because: 1) why WOULDN'T it have babies? What kind of settlement has no infants? 2) one can easily just reference real world historical events to get ideas of how medieval people often handled similar issues, and 3) it allows character development. Maybe it can serve as a plot device too... maybe the PCs decide to round up the babies on a caravan, and fund an orphanage for them. Or then again, maybe they kill them all, and get some people (goblins or otherwise) seek to make them pay for this atrocity. But the core remains that it should be fairly straightforward that whatever arguments are conjured are not applicable to the real world, and thus that nobody is really arguing that going around killing babies is morally acceptable.

Abortions, though? That distinction isn't possible, and I don't see how a world risks jeopordizing its suspend of disbelief by simply completely ignoring the issue. Nor what addressing the question could possibly add to the setting.

Real-world ethical debates aren't appropriate for the gaming table.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Trogdar wrote:


I would assume that all women in this universe would be judged harshly, as the number of fetuses that don't make it to term are numerous.

Careful.

This is where the discussion can get derailed.

If a plague comes through and kills the child, is it the mother's fault?

Not if she did everything to protect their child.

If the orcs invade and slaughter everyone, including every pregnant mother, is that the mother's fault?

Again, no.

And as others have stated, the RL discussion needs to happen elsewhere, and perhaps this should be tabled for now?

Silver Crusade

Bard-Sader wrote:
Hwalsh, also I don't buy the claim that Pharasma raised Aroden as an undead. Her basic core tenets are as anti-undead as it gets!

Well, her servant is a ghost that looks like Aroden, but it claims not to be him or his remnants...so it's hard to say. Personally I think it's (like the name says) an "echo" of the god, but not his actual soul.

EDUT: Also, he is a unique ghost, so exactly how "undead" he is, is up for debate.


I think Trogdar is just bring facetious, but the rest of us are on topic.

So basically, Isonarod you are saying that just because the judge of souls sees something as an abomination does not necessarily mean it is evil? Are you saying Pharasma doesn't see it as evil or that her own value judgement has no bearing on where souls get sent?

Silver Crusade

Bard-Sader wrote:

I think Trogdar is just bring facetious, but the rest of us are on topic.

So basically, Isonarod you are saying that just because the judge of souls sees something as an abomination does not necessarily mean it is evil? Are you saying Pharasma doesn't see it as evil or that her own value judgement has no bearing on where souls get sent?

I don't think evil really applies to Pharisma's teachings. Keep in mind, evil is NOT subjective in Golarion (otherwise a paladin of Abadar could smite good creatures who violate the tenants of Abadar's faith), so Pharisma's personal feelings on an issue are not plotted on the good/evil axis.

EDUT: Also it seems like Pharisma's personal feelings have little to do with her judgements (unless she's judging one of her own followers). It seems like a lot of it is more-or-less automatic. If you faithfully live Iomedae's teachings, you get sent her way. You sell your soul to Asmodeus and you go to Hell. Really, the only time she seems to take a direct interest is when there is something unique or questionable about the soul in dispute.


Bard-Sader wrote:
HWalsh, Are you SURE about the whole worshipper of other gods don't get judged by her thing? That'd only leave her it's atheists or something. I'm pretty sure she gets ALL souls to judge except for very unusual circumstances.

Negative. I said that the Gods can take people before they get to her. This doesn't automatically mean all followers. Just the special ones they take a personal interest in. (Likely Paladins, Clerics, etc.)

Pharasma isn't the end all be all.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Why


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Evacuate Evacuate


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Not going near this one....


Bard-Sader wrote:

I think Trogdar is just bring facetious, but the rest of us are on topic.

So basically, Isonarod you are saying that just because the judge of souls sees something as an abomination does not necessarily mean it is evil? Are you saying Pharasma doesn't see it as evil or that her own value judgement has no bearing on where souls get sent?

*Goes and looks up the definition*

That basically describes me, yeah.

Scarab Sages

8 people marked this as a favorite.

I, for one, am overjoyed that the normally argumentative, heated forum-goers have banded together in the opinion of "NOPE."


1 person marked this as a favorite.

This thread has been very civil. I'm happy about that. I trust in the maturity of the general paizo forumite.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

So...since we are bringing up morality into this, I think it might be productive (read: funny) to bring up another issue unique to a fantasy game: What if you baby is evil?

This is an actual question, with ligitimate implications. What if a woman has a half fiend? A rakshasa? Some kind of tentacled horror?

And we can also go into GOOD OLD TORAG territory with just monstrous childen- the baby goblin problem. Or more accurately, the baby half orc problem. And for areas with FAR less grey areas, what about unborn lycanthropes, and other various nasty things that tend to be less ambiguous with morality? (I call this Torag territory, since I think his 'kill 'em all' attitude towards threats would be more forgiving than Pharasma in the less ambiguous circumstances)

Not that I am leaning any particular way with that last paragraph. In fact, I am a big fan of Mikaze's threads on monster orphanages. But you must admit- the sheer practical problems do complicate the question of whether abortion is moral in general.

Silver Crusade RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Bard-Sader wrote:
So, is this paizo's intended statement? That in Golarion, abortion is evil?

There has actually been some discussion of this with Paizo staff elsewhere, especially with regards to other things that have been written in official Paizo products about cultists of the evil god Zyphus killing the unborn.

Basically they recognize this is a touchy subject, and although they don't reprint Adventure Paths (which is where the Zyphus stuff comes from), there may be errata for Inner Sea Gods regarding Pharasma's stance on this. It may be revised to simply not mention anything at all about it, as they want to be very thoughtful and deliberate about how - and if - they want to address this topic in game.

Silver Crusade Contributor

mechaPoet wrote:
Bard-Sader wrote:
So, is this paizo's intended statement? That in Golarion, abortion is evil?

There has actually been some discussion of this with Paizo staff elsewhere, especially with regards to other things that have been written in official Paizo products about cultists of the evil god Zyphus killing the unborn.

Basically they recognize this is a touchy subject, and although they don't reprint Adventure Paths (which is where the Zyphus stuff comes from), there may be errata for Inner Sea Gods regarding Pharasma's stance on this. It may be revised to simply not mention anything at all about it, as they want to be very thoughtful and deliberate about how - and if - they want to address this topic in game.

Since Zyphus is getting an entry in Inner Sea Faiths, that opportunity may be closer than you think. ^_^

Silver Crusade Contributor

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Also, it bears mentioning that these services have been available in Golarion since Pathfinder Adventure Path #1: Burnt Offerings, and the relevant text wasn't cut from the Rise of the Runelords Anniversary Edition.


Pharasma's opinions do not necessarily coincide with whatever mystical source of info detect evil draws on, so no, I don't think RAW comments one way or the other.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Torag says that bats are an "abomination," and he's a good god. But bats are neutral, and I don't think that anybody at Paizo has the belief that bats are evil.


Castilonium wrote:
Torag says that bats are an "abomination," and he's a good god. But bats are neutral, and I don't think that anybody at Paizo has the belief that bats are evil.

True, but as the arbiter of souls, Pharasma's opinions *may* have more weight than Torag's stances. That's one of the questions of my thread, really.

lemeres wrote:

So...since we are bringing up morality into this, I think it might be productive (read: funny) to bring up another issue unique to a fantasy game: What if you baby is evil?

This is an actual question, with ligitimate implications. What if a woman has a half fiend? A rakshasa? Some kind of tentacled horror?

And we can also go into GOOD OLD TORAG territory with just monstrous childen- the baby goblin problem. Or more accurately, the baby half orc problem. And for areas with FAR less grey areas, what about unborn lycanthropes, and other various nasty things that tend to be less ambiguous with morality? (I call this Torag territory, since I think his 'kill 'em all' attitude towards threats would be more forgiving than Pharasma in the less ambiguous circumstances)

Not that I am leaning any particular way with that last paragraph. In fact, I am a big fan of Mikaze's threads on monster orphanages. But you must admit- the sheer practical problems do complicate the question of whether abortion is moral in general.

i think paizo's is pretty clear cut on the matter of killing based purely on species? I mean, forget about a half fiend, baby or not. What about full fiends? We have Arushulae, a redeemed succubus! If even a succubus can redeem, isn't it evil to just kill a baby because it has fiend blood? Where does it end? Will people start a eugenics program and kill tieflings too?


I think they've avoid the topic in their books because of a reason. And I don't think there would be any clear cuts if there was anyway, some would say it's evil, some would say something else. Much how many of the philosophies differ within them selves (like Sarenrae's general one and the cult of the dawnflower), I think this answer would to.


Bard-Sader wrote:
i think paizo's is pretty clear cut on the matter of killing based purely on species? I mean, forget about a half fiend, baby or not. What about full fiends? We have Arushulae, a redeemed succubus! If even a succubus can redeem, isn't it evil to just kill a baby because it has fiend blood? Where does it end? Will people start a eugenics program and kill tieflings too?

Yeah, and all it took was the direct intervention of a diety! So easy!

And as a counter- the paladin code for Torag (a lawful good diety of dwarves):

Paladin Code (Torag) wrote:
=Against my people’s enemies, I will show no mercy. I will not allow their surrender, except when strategy warrants. I will defeat them, yet even in the direst struggle, I will act in a way that brings honor to Torag.

NO SURRRENDER! KILL THEM ALL! But I am totalyl lawful good, yo!

Silver Crusade Contributor

1 person marked this as a favorite.

It also bears mentioning that the character from Rise of the Runelords is NG.

Rise of the Runelords:
While Abstalar Zantus (area 1) does his best to take care of Sandpoint's truly sick and needy, he can't help everyone. For minor aches, pains, and illnesses, most of Sandpoint's citizens depend on HANNAH VELERIN (NG female elf cleric of Gozreh 3/expert 1). Hannah spends most of her mornings out in the surrounding wilds, gathering herbs or simply enjoying Gozreh's bounty. In the afternoons, she returns to her shop and home here to prepare medicines and receive patients. Hannah's ironically the one to go to when one either wants to end a pregnancy or needs a midwife to aid in a birth; Hannah encourages all of the women she sees to carry to term, and advises the use of pinberry extract to young women as a way to prevent any unwanted pregnancies from happening in the first place, but in cases where there's no other option, her other services are discreet and confidential.

As you can see, the text at least attempts some nuance.


So, if there is only one objective, absolute TRUTH to what GOOD is, how come the different Good deities disagree on how to be Good? Sarenrae would likely have some harsh comments about how Torag expects his Paladins to act.

Do the major deities actually get confused about the objective truth or morality?

Silver Crusade Contributor

Hmm... derail into a pure alignment thread. Not what I expected. ^_^


Kalindlara wrote:
Hmm... derail into a pure alignment thread. Not what I expected. ^_^

err...what were you expecting instead?


Bard-Sader wrote:

So, if there is only one objective, absolute TRUTH to what GOOD is, how come the different Good deities disagree on how to be Good? Sarenrae would likely have some harsh comments about how Torag expects his Paladins to act.

Do the major deities actually get confused about the objective truth or morality?

It does get...wobbly.

I mean....abandoning your responsibilities to your friends, family, and neighbors to give a ton of obviously untrustworthy individuals countles s chances that get betrayed again and again? How...undwarf-y.

It can be a fine balance between offering chances and protecting people.

But yes, torag paladins can be fairly....METAL.


Purge the Unclean? Suffer not the alien to live? ;)

Silver Crusade Contributor

Bard-Sader wrote:
Kalindlara wrote:
Hmm... derail into a pure alignment thread. Not what I expected. ^_^
err...what were you expecting instead?

A very sensitive social issue sparking a massive flame-war. ^_^

However, as several posters earlier noted, the thread has been rather civil about the topic.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Note that the same passage says that priests of Pharasma perform abortions... though apparently only when the pregnancy would otherwise kill both the woman and her fetus.

That said, the central argument presented is that an unborn fetus has a soul... matching the modern re-imagining of Christian belief on this issue (which has displaced the older/biblical view that the soul entered the body when the first breath was drawn). Once you include the concept of souls in the game, without which much of the logical purpose for 'gods' is lost, questions of where they come from and how they work are inevitable. However, this could have simply been left vague/unstated rather than having the metaphysics of Golarion match one subset of religious/moral beliefs about such in our reality.

As to Pharasma's view and 'evil', the passage indicates that her objection is that the soul hasn't done anything yet and thus had no opportunity to determine how it would be judged. It has nothing to do with 'good' or 'evil'... indeed, Pharasma doesn't view actual obvious evil as "abomination". Her objection is that it makes her own role as judge impossible/irrelevant... there is nothing TO judge.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
CBDunkerson wrote:
That said, the central argument presented is that an unborn fetus has a soul... matching the modern re-imagining of Christian belief on this issue (which has displaced the older/biblical view that the soul entered the body when the first breath was drawn).

Just want to point out that from Psalms 22:10, Psalms 139:13 and Jeremiah 1:5, the Biblical view has always been that an unborn fetus has a soul. There was no 're-imagining' involved.

I would think that whether or not this holds true in Golarion would be the key to answering whether abortion is evil in Golarion. At the very least, I would think it holds true for outsiders if they reproduce sexually since for outsiders the body and soul are one, so there is no question at least that outsiders are alive in the womb if they are born through pregnancy.

Silver Crusade

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Oh, abortions and rules for tabletop wargaming! So, if a Paladin smites a woman with a LE fetus inside of her, does he get to add bonuses to attack and damage?


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Gorbacz wrote:
Oh, abortions and rules for tabletop wargaming! So, if a Paladin smites a woman with a LE fetus inside of her, does he get to add bonuses to attack and damage?

If a paladin kills an evil woman with an innocent fetus inside of her, does he fall?

1 to 50 of 142 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Lost Omens Campaign Setting / General Discussion / By RAW, in Golarion, is abortion evil? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.