In a game I am running, one of my players wanted his character to perform a Coup-De-Gras on himself (due to circumstances, it made perfect sense). I ruled that you could voluntarily make yourself helpless, and as such ruled that he could make the attempt. Due to something else he failed to do so, but that's beside the point.
I know it's my game, but strictly RAW, can you perform a Coup-De-Gras on yourself? Can you voluntarily be helpless (including to yourself)?
There is no rule allowing this, this would be a houserule.
There's precedent in a particular scenario - a haunt focused on a kitchen knife that causes PCs who fail their save to pick it up and CdG themselves.
Could you post the rules for that scenario?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
All - in this instance the PC was Warpriest of Naderi (Goddess of Suicides) and was adjacent to a strong enemy that was intending to capture him alive for its own uses (player suspected that enemy had access to Dominate Person).
Player said he'd try to Coup-De-Gras himself.
I ruled that it could work, as you could be voluntarily helpless, even to yourself (Character had previously shown he was looking to go out in a means that would please his goddess.) I tend to rule in the players favor in the heat of the moment to keep the game going, but if I later (after the game) determine I was wrong the next session I let the players know and that my previous ruling was a one-time-only thing.
However, player forgot that a CdG triggers an AOO, and you can be knocked out in the meantime by an AOO.
So by the end of the session, the character tried to kill himself 3 times and failed. Good times.
Can you kill yourself? Yes.
Personally I'd have them make a will save not to. Wanting to live is an instinct.
Normally I'd agree, but due to the unique circumstances (worshiper of a goddess of suicides, knowing that death is preferred to the alternative) I didn't see the characters mind being unwilling.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Could you post the rules for that scenario?
I'm assuming he's talking about
... The haunted character must make a DC 15 Will save. Failure indicates he moves over to the desk and attempts a coup de grace on himself with the jagged length of wood, dealing 2d4 (pluse twice his Strength modifier) points of damage to himself. He must make a Fortitude save (DC 10 + the damage dealt) to avoid being slain by the suicide attempt ...
So basically a normal coup de grace with a 1d4x2 weapon. The will save in this case is because the character is being compelled to do this, rather than freely wanting to.
I don't think you can perform a coup-de-gras while helpless
I didn't even think of that.
See the character wasn't actually helpless, he just wanted to CdG himself, and my thinking was:
1) You can CdG someone that's helpless
2) You can voluntarily be helpless (or be considered helpless to someone)
3) He's not actually helpless, so he can perform the CdG
Therefore I allowed it.
Cavall had a great point regarding the willingness to live, which would normally be applicable.
TY for the scenario. It appears to be a special case of compulsion rather than helpless.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Bizarre shit like this is why game masters are allowed to ignore the rules. Given this very specific set of circumstances, what the rules allow became secondary to the story. There was no loophole being exploited, nothing that helped the player "win".
Bizarre s~+! like this is why game masters are allowed to ignore the rules. Given this very specific set of circumstances, what the rules allow became secondary to the story. There was no loophole being exploited, nothing that helped the player "win".
Agreed 100%.
My players have been very good of not abusing loopholes, and even ask me if I am ok with loopholes they find when making characters (99% of them have been OK, 1% was OK-for-now-but-lets-see-what-happens-don't-abuse-it, and they don't).
That being said, it was a very entertaining encounter, and everyone at the table had fun (from what I can tell).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
if you're helpless, you can't perform a coup de grace
but if you are able to take a full rd action, and not balking at it (some people have mentioned a will ST?), you could perfom a suicide coup de grace on yourself, since you're not resisting... note, I think there are fortitude STss tied to surviving the thing, you can't voluntarily fail those, since will to live is an instinct, and the effectiveness of your attemps can't be assessed as waiving those.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'd rule as Klorox is saying.
By the way, I've been trying my best not to give way to my correcting obsession (specially as, not being a native English speaker I probably need a lot of correction too) but it's too hard to me to resist!!!
Coup de grâce.
I'm sorry. I couldn't resist.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
if you're helpless, you can't perform a coup de grace
but if you are able to take a full rd action, and not balking at it (some people have mentioned a will ST?), you could perfom a suicide coup de grace on yourself, since you're not resisting... note, I think there are fortitude STss tied to surviving the thing, you can't voluntarily fail those, since will to live is an instinct, and the effectiveness of your attemps can't be assessed as waiving those.
Correct, if he could have completed the CdG, then there's the Fort save vs death, which I would have had him roll.
I'd rule as Klorox is saying.
By the way, I've been trying my best not to give way to my correcting obsession (specially as, not being a native English speaker I probably need a lot of correction too) but it's too hard to me to resist!!!
Coup de grâce.
I'm sorry. I couldn't resist.
Ah, there's the accent. Thanks, I knew there was an accent but for some reason I thought it was on the last e.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'd rule as Klorox is saying.
By the way, I've been trying my best not to give way to my correcting obsession (specially as, not being a native English speaker I probably need a lot of correction too) but it's too hard to me to resist!!!
Coup de grâce.
I'm sorry. I couldn't resist.I know I have the same urge.
I'm a former French as Second Language teacher and a gamer and when I have players say Coup de Gras (koo duh GRAH) as oppose to Coup de Grâce (koo duh GRAHS), I must always resist the urge to ask why they what a Shot of Fat rather than perform a Mercy Blow? So far I've always beengood in keeping my mouth shut.
But nitpicking aside, I agree that if the person have access to a full-round action and succeed a Will save (unless circumstances allow the GM to waive it) he could attempt to perform a Coup de Grâce on himself (with the Fort save that goes with it) as a viable yet extreme way out of the situation.
Lol!
I have French as my... fourth language, and I must admit I'm not very proficient in it, but I'm still too obsessed with correcting everything.I deserve my posts to be corrected by someone else so I can taste my own medicine.
But I won't stop doing it. Me and my weak will save!
Cut the grass!
That's how you perform a Coup de grâce on a plant creature, I guess.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I seem to recall that the Jade Regent adventure path had several opponents who, in the GM instructions for their tactics, would explicitly Coup de Grâce themselves (commit Seppuku) if the battle turned against them. I think in the 4th module? I'd have to look at it to be certain. But from my recollection it was written as if doing so was as simple as pulling out a dagger and attacking yourself.
|
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
I would also add if you care for RAI rather than RAW, the intent would be that a creature will defend itself from a CDG, so they must be helpless for you to perform it. However if a creature wanted to kill itself then it would not take actions to prevent it, thus would not need to be helpless.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Considering ritual suicide exists in the form at seppuku, it's hard to say you can't coup-de-grace yourself, but there isn't explicitly a rule allowed for it.
That being said, if a character wants to kill themselves they should probably be able to do it.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This I should kind of a thread derailment but, as someone who primarily uses English but knows a few other languages well enough to read and write, technology makes it grammatically difficult. With my keyboard I can either write coup de grace, or I can re-learn what combination of alternative key let's me write â. Strangely enough, coup de grâce is easier for me on mobile as I have multi-lingual keyboards.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This I should kind of a thread derailment but, as someone who primarily uses English but knows a few other languages well enough to read and write, technology makes it grammatically difficult. With my keyboard I can either write coup de grace, or I can re-learn what combination of alternative key let's me write â. Strangely enough, coup de grâce is easier for me on mobile as I have multi-lingual keyboards.
I wasn't being nitpicky about the "^" but because of changing "Coup de grâce" for "Coup de gras".
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Considering ritual suicide exists in the form at seppuku, it's hard to say you can't coup-de-grace yourself, but there isn't explicitly a rule allowed for it.
That being said, if a character wants to kill themselves they should probably be able to do it.
Depends on houserules, but I agree, I don't think Pathfinder rules would prevent a coup de grace on yourself.
For houserules against, 2 common ones come to mind. First, GM could definitely claim this qualified as PVP and was therefore an illegal action in a setting that doesn't allow players to attack players. The other one, is a GM that has issues with players switching characters too often, they may have a houserule that prevents suicide and forces players to continue with their chosen character until a natural death occurs.
I know, those are houserules, but I think they are common enough where they are worth mentioning, despite not being official rules.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So....uh...phonetically and typing-wise, what's the correct way to say and type it?
So....uh...phonetically and typing-wise, what's the correct way to say and type it?
Kileanna had it in the post two above yours. "Coup de gras" is obviously incorrect since "gras" means "fat".
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I would also add if you care for RAI rather than RAW, the intent would be that a creature will defend itself from a CDG, so they must be helpless for you to perform it. However if a creature wanted to kill itself then it would not take actions to prevent it, thus would not need to be helpless.
Yeah, there are several similar parts of the rules that refer to a character that is "helpless or willing."
You may implant a bomb in a willing or helpless creature.
A nosferatu can suck blood from a helpless, willing, or grappled living victim
The target creature must be dead, helpless, or willing. If the target creature is alive, the skin stealer must make a successful coup de grace attack to steal its skin.
The last one gives the Skin Stealer the ability to CdG a willing but not helpless creature (though not themselves).
I think you made the right call.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
They were doing it right, Weirdo! Why did you go back to the topic? Just let the topic derail!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Back to the derail!
When you give the pronunciation as "koo duh GRAHS," do you mean that the "S" is English "ssss" (voiceless), or English "zzzz" (voiced)? That is, is it really "grass" except with a different vowel?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It is voiceless, so like "grass" but more in the direction of "grahss".
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
It is voiceless, so like "grass" but more in the direction of "grahss".
I took a little French, but I've been pronouncing it as a cut of fat, so thanks for the education. Roleplay and get a good education, that's my motto!
It is voiceless, so like "grass" but more in the direction of "grahss".
Did somebody say "grahss"? 'Cause I'd, like, totally coup some of that, man...
Unless you're talking about yard work. Let it grow, man, let it grow.
If a player of his own free will decides to commit suicide out of combat, there is no question that he will eventually succeed. Change any of these factors, however, and you will want a more robust system in place to handle what happens. For example, attempted suicide is one of the possible results of a Confusion spell, but because it is a momentary mental aberration, the affected character does not inflict a coup de grace on himself.
|
|
Here's the thing, you say suicide is allowed in the game.
So your party is exploring the dungeon. And your CN rogue goes through the dungeon quickly, trying aggro every mob at once. Then they suicide, leaving the remaining party members to fight the entire dungeon at once. And now the GM has to rescue the party, or allow the TPK to happen.
I would be opposed to allowing intentional, non-productive suicide in my games (productive suicide would be being a martyr when it was needed to save the rest of the party). If a player doesn't want to continue, they don't have to come to the session.
If you want to play a semi-suicidal character concept, I don't mind that, and there are even some neat build options there. That said, I am strongly opposed to players that purposely suicide after I figure in the CR of encounters based on a full party of living PCs.
I suppose if the player just wanted to play a character concept where the character died in every session, that could be fun, but only if I, the GM, was notified ahead of time.
I was only addressing the game mechanics, not the player problems that would be introduced by frequent PC suicide. Obviously, if a player is having his character commit suicide frequently or for trivial reasons, then that player has a problem that needs to be addressed before you continue the game.
|
Obviously a character should be able to do this. It happens in real life, there is no rule to forbid it, it isn't overpowered. Why would one possibly outlaw it?
Heck, I've had bad guys do it. Mostly as an acknowledgement that they are woefully outclassed but they do it to keep some agency in their final moments.
|
|
I was only addressing the game mechanics, not the player problems that would be introduced by frequent PC suicide. Obviously, if a player is having his character commit suicide frequently or for trivial reasons, then that player has a problem that needs to be addressed before you continue the game.
Okay, in terms of game mechanics, I've found it iffy if characters are allowed to attack themselves at all. There are a few special abilities that seem to assume that characters are able to take attack themselves, but there don't seem to be exact rules that effect.
Coup De Grace requires an "opponent" as the target. This distinction does seem a bit "rules lawyery". Still, I really haven't found exact rules that allow a character attack themselves, and rules which in flavor have the character damaging themselves, usually use alternate mechanics, rather than allowing attack rolls from the player to the player.
Even the spell "Confusion" where you "attack yourself with held weapon" doesn't actually use the weapon's profile or any attack rules, it just auto damages the creature d8+str mod damage.
The Pain Taster prestige class, has an ability called "Masochism (ex)" in which the character can damage itself in exchange for melee bonuses. Again, this doesn't use the attack rules, it just auto damages the character.
So, I think with very strict RAW, you can't attack yourself. Should still be able to suicide in alternate methods (like drowning), but pathfinder rules don't really allow characters to target themselves with melee attack options. This RAW is very petty and would likely be ignored by most players and GMs, discarded as sloppy rules writting.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think the reason self-damaging mechanics are usually treated differently from normal attacks is that:
1) Characters trying to hurt themselves shouldn't have the chance of failing implied by an attack roll - similar to how you can automatically touch an ally with a touch spell, but more so.
2) It's easier to balance when the damage dealt is more predictable.
Here's the thing, you say suicide is allowed in the game.
So your party is exploring the dungeon. And your CN rogue goes through the dungeon quickly, trying aggro every mob at once. Then they suicide, leaving the remaining party members to fight the entire dungeon at once. And now the GM has to rescue the party, or allow the TPK to happen.
I would be opposed to allowing intentional, non-productive suicide in my games (productive suicide would be being a martyr when it was needed to save the rest of the party). If a player doesn't want to continue, they don't have to come to the session.
If you want to play a semi-suicidal character concept, I don't mind that, and there are even some neat build options there. That said, I am strongly opposed to players that purposely suicide after I figure in the CR of encounters based on a full party of living PCs.
I suppose if the player just wanted to play a character concept where the character died in every session, that could be fun, but only if I, the GM, was notified ahead of time.
I think this is covered by the "Don't be a dick" clause of the game. The problem here isn't the character committing suicide. It's getting everyone else killed on purpose in the process.
I think this is covered by the "Don't be a dick" clause of the game. The problem here isn't the character committing suicide. It's getting everyone else killed on purpose in the process.Here's the thing, you say suicide is allowed in the game.
So your party is exploring the dungeon. And your CN rogue goes through the dungeon quickly, trying aggro every mob at once. Then they suicide, leaving the remaining party members to fight the entire dungeon at once. And now the GM has to rescue the party, or allow the TPK to happen.
I would be opposed to allowing intentional, non-productive suicide in my games (productive suicide would be being a martyr when it was needed to save the rest of the party). If a player doesn't want to continue, they don't have to come to the session.
If you want to play a semi-suicidal character concept, I don't mind that, and there are even some neat build options there. That said, I am strongly opposed to players that purposely suicide after I figure in the CR of encounters based on a full party of living PCs.
I suppose if the player just wanted to play a character concept where the character died in every session, that could be fun, but only if I, the GM, was notified ahead of time.
In this case the character was doing it to prevent being used as a tool against the future parties. He made the right call...however he should have just attacked himself, not CdGed.