Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game

Starfinder


Pathfinder Society


Pathfinder Adventure Card Game

Paladins Falling on Lycanthropy


Advice

151 to 200 of 219 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>
Shadow Lodge

CorvusMask wrote:
"how do I avoid lying without it being lie of omission".

"Lie of omission" is absolute malarkey that isn't a thing, at all, for a paladin. Paladins are not beholden to flowery turns of phrase.


Wow, paladin's threats really can be the hot spot here...

Guys, i would like to say something.
After reading all your coments i think i can say a few things about this that may help a little.

1. Please, calm down, i dont like to see bro's talking rude to each other.

2. It is true that paladin's cant use poisons, and wolfbane is listed as a poison, so if we focus on that, darksol is correct.

3. Intents and intention allways matters, thats for sure, but we have to be carefull if we are going to let our paladin broke the code when its for a good cause. It is true when fellas here said : "thats neutral good, not lawfull good". If you are going to break the code and keep going, then your code is not that serious, and you should not be surprised if someone near you call you a liar or an impostor.

4. Acting might and noble is not an excuse to make something you should not be doing. Does the end justify means? not in the case of paladin's players.

5. You can't apply rules of our world to Pathfinder, that will bring chaos to the table.

6. you also can't be so serious with the rules, if you want to apply the rules as a computer, you rather play a videogame, it has better graphics and you will be just as limited as in your rolegame. The essence of role-gaming is to have fun and be flexible sometimes, but not all the times.

7. Guys, dont worry about the dose. Only wolfbane cure licantrophy, and the dose required for that is probably the same dose you need to poison someone. Come on, if the dude fails he also takes damage, so...

8. There are plenty of options to safe your brother in arms rather than use a poison. Is it that hard to see that a paladin cant do everything even if the goal is for a greater good?

9. Supplements that appear in this game are just that, supplements, and we are talking about basic rules here. Please, dont give explanations with suplements that some people may dont know about. If i take all the suplements in the game i'm sure i can build a monk that knows how to kame-hame-ha, but that should not be possible with the basic rules.

10. lets all be friends ok? this is a debate! not a fight!

Me, Graelsis, leader of the goblin tribe of the Fancy Dancers, want to invite you all to enjoy a great dinner in our main cave while we discuss about how cool is to see a paladin crying about a dead butterfly of Desna


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Ok. By the narrow reading of the rules? Then yes, you're absolutely right.

Administering Wolfsbane (defined as a poison) to a lycanthrope, even if your intent is to cure, not to harm, is a violation of the Paladin's code and would make them fall, if you go with a strictly literal reading of the code (interpreting "use of poison" as an absolute stricture, as opposed to an example of dishonorable behavior, and allowing there to be interpretation of what dishonorable behavior is.)

And if that's how a table wants to play it? Bully for them. Have at. I'll politely excuse myself from that gaming group, because I don't see how that can possibly be fun.

I prefer a Pathfinder game that always keeps this in mind:

Quote:

The Most Important Rule

The rules presented are here to help you breathe life into your characters and the world they explore. While they are designed to make your game easy and exciting, you might find that some of them do not suit the style of play that your gaming group enjoys. Remember that these rules are yours. You can change them to fit your needs. Most Game Masters have a number of "house rules" that they use in their games. The Game Master and players should always discuss any rules changes to make sure that everyone understands how the game will be played. Although the Game Master is the final arbiter of the rules, the Pathfinder RPG is a shared experience, and all of the players should contribute their thoughts when the rules are in doubt.

If that gaming group finds such an absolutely literal reading of the rules about poison and the Paladin's code to be fun? I'm happy for them. I wouldn't, nor would my gaming group.


AaronUnicorn wrote:


If that gaming group finds such an absolutely literal reading of the rules about poison and the Paladin's code to be fun? I'm happy for them. I wouldn't, nor would my gaming group.

And that's why i love this game, because you can look for people who fit your gaming style and have so much fun!

Also, i agree with you, i'm not fond in following the rules to the letter. I preffer flexibility and narrating over hard limits, however, thats nothing rather than a personal point of view ^^

are you gonna eat that dog?


Never said it was fun to rule it that way. It's actually the opposite because, well...look at the thread.

All I said was that a lot of arguments being posed were strawmans and that they aren't valid counterpoints for that very reason.


Darksol the Painbringer wrote:

Never said it was fun to rule it that way. It's actually the opposite because, well...look at the thread.

All I said was that a lot of arguments being posed were strawmans and that they aren't valid counterpoints for that very reason.

So you have done all of this because you want people to argue?

I like you, tall folk, now just bend your knee for a moment, i want to make you the official tall folk of our tribe.

Silver Crusade

8 people marked this as a favorite.

Ultra literal interpretation of what the rules say is futile and silly.

1) No written language is precise enough to be parsed this way. None. There is NO SUCH THING AS THE ONE AND ONLY RULES AS WRITTEN. English is ambiguous. Poison is NOT explicitly defined in Pathfinder. Examples are listed but that is NOT the same as a definition.

2) Any attempt to even come close to precise language results in very turgid legalistic prose. Paizo, being sane people, did NOT choose to go that route in Pathfinder. So, the language is readable, open to interpretation, and requires common sense to interpret.

Darksol - You are being FAR too literal in your interpretation. Can the words be interpreted the way you are? Yes. Should they? No. Would any GM who was trying to be remotely fair to the player of a paladin interpret them that way? No.

Dark Archive

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
BigNorseWolf wrote:
CorvusMask wrote:
"how do I avoid lying without it being lie of omission".

"Lie of omission" is absolute malarkey that isn't a thing, at all, for a paladin. Paladins are not beholden to flowery turns of phrase.

Lie of omission IS a thing though, its withholding vital information that changes context of what you say. Heck, I'll give you wikipedia example:

"For example, when the seller of a car declares it has been serviced regularly but does not tell that a fault was reported at the last service, the seller lies by omission."

(BTW, wikipedia for some reason has handy long list on different types of lying <_< Huh, weird)

Anyway, I don't think paladin should actually fall for lying unless its dishonorable short of deception. I don't think most honor codes say that white lies are dishonorable? Anyhoo, thats getting off topic, but I think I should stay out of this thread too since topic is getting nowhere and I'm not sure if people I'm replying to are even checking this thread anymore


A paladin is not lying simply by not volunteering information.
A paladin is lying when she leaves important information out of an otherwise factually true statement in order to deceive someone.


pauljathome wrote:

Ultra literal interpretation of what the rules say is futile and silly.

1) No written language is precise enough to be parsed this way. None. There is NO SUCH THING AS THE ONE AND ONLY RULES AS WRITTEN. English is ambiguous. Poison is NOT explicitly defined in Pathfinder. Examples are listed but that is NOT the same as a definition.

2) Any attempt to even come close to precise language results in very turgid legalistic prose. Paizo, being sane people, did NOT choose to go that route in Pathfinder. So, the language is readable, open to interpretation, and requires common sense to interpret.

Darksol - You are being FAR too literal in your interpretation. Can the words be interpreted the way you are? Yes. Should they? No. Would any GM who was trying to be remotely fair to the player of a paladin interpret them that way? No.

Never said there was one true RAW for anything in Pathfinder. Arguing against something I didn't say is a strawman.

Pathfinder has a whole section dedicated to explaining what poisons are, and their mechanics, as well as the formatting we can expect when it comes to poison. It's actually better defined than iterative attacks if we're talking RAW. Anyway, if that's not a definition, then you can burn your Core Rulebook, demand a refund from Paizo, and buy a Webster's dictionary instead, it'd probably be more helpful to your game. (Yes, this last part is sarcasm.)

Shadow Lodge

CorvusMask wrote:

Lie of omission IS a thing though,

Poisoning the well is a thing too. Are you going to have paladins fall for that?

"Of course he says there's no problem with zombies, he's a necromancer!"

Falls.

"... what possessed me to pick a god of online philosophy...."

Quote:
(BTW, wikipedia for some reason has handy long list on different types of lying <_< Huh, weird)

Other things the list includes

-hiding (so you're saying paladins fall for lying with stealth checks)

-deceiving, so bluffing, feinting in combat, pulling your troops back to goad the enemy into attacking you,

-sleight of hand to move a ball around.

I do not believe that the wiki list is what's meant by lying.

A misleading statement is one where there is no outright lie, but still retains the purpose of getting someone to believe in an untruth.

Paladins CAN mislead. They CANNOT lie.

noun
1.
a false statement made with deliberate intent to deceive; an intentional untruth; a falsehood.

If the statement is true, it's not a lie.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I think, honestly, the issue is that even you wouldn't run the game like that for your paladin if you had a paladin. You've said this situation is entirely hypothetical, and not something that's happening, because you wanted to see how people would respond to a situation where a paladin has to make a hard choice.

But unless the GM is an absolute ass, I don't see how this could even come up. What GM is actually going to say "Okay, Paladin; you're gonna fall if you use Wolfsbane to try and cure your friend?" Only a GM that was purposely trying to ruffle his player's feathers.

There are better scenarios you can come up with if you want a "Find a hidden third option, Paladin" scenario, where option A breaks his code but option B just isn't as smart or is a non-action, but there are alternatives to choose if you think hard enough. Making a scenario that's entirely based around as silly a premise as "Using a known cure of lycanthropy to cure a friend is technically poisoning them" is just... Honestly, it's kind of a dumb scenario that wouldn't actually come up at a gaming table.

So, you can tell people they're using strawman arguments as much as you like, but frankly the very premise on which you're basing the thread is not a very interesting one. Devise scenarios that actually would come up at a gaming table. You know they're out there, and you can make your own.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

This whole arguement about using poisons is silly anyway. Every true paladin knows that poisons are expensive and come at rubbish DCs not to mention causing irritating loss of class features. Paladins instead should stick with slathering their blades with opium or other drugs. After all, drugs are not poisons (they're in the drug section and are unaffected by poison immunity!) and the ability damage does not carry a save associated with it. Sure some people may say it's not "honorable" to deliberately make opponents high mid-fight with illicit substances but pish-posh. Acting with honor only specifies poisons and as we established drugs are not poison.

QED.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Tarik Blackhands wrote:

This whole arguement about using poisons is silly anyway. Every true paladin knows that poisons are expensive and come at rubbish DCs not to mention causing irritating loss of class features. Paladins instead should stick with slathering their blades with opium or other drugs. After all, drugs are not poisons (they're in the drug section and are unaffected by poison immunity!) and the ability damage does not carry a save associated with it. Sure some people may say it's not "honorable" to deliberately make opponents high mid-fight with illicit substances but pish-posh. Acting with honor only specifies poisons and as we established drugs are not poison.

QED.

You're making your opponents last moments painless and happy, rather than forcing them to live through the painful process of disembowelment before they die.


A problem with that interpretation of Wolfsbane is that you're assuming that using it as an ad hoc cure means it stops being a Poison. If I use Wolfsbane in that manner, they still have to make a saving throw, deal with the onset, ability damage, and so on. Which can kill them with some really unlucky rolls.

Real life examples really only apply when you're trying to explain an existing rule in a more life-applicable manner. Saying Real life facts trump rules with the text not say anything like that is just plain silly.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

The word is not the thing. The name is not the nature. Wolfsbane is called a poison but in this instance it doesn't work as such.
Nitrogliceryn is an explosive but is also a medication for hearth failure. When doctor uses it, she doesn't break her Hippocratic Oath or uses her Craft (Explosives) skill to administer it.


Ventnor wrote:
Tarik Blackhands wrote:

This whole arguement about using poisons is silly anyway. Every true paladin knows that poisons are expensive and come at rubbish DCs not to mention causing irritating loss of class features. Paladins instead should stick with slathering their blades with opium or other drugs. After all, drugs are not poisons (they're in the drug section and are unaffected by poison immunity!) and the ability damage does not carry a save associated with it. Sure some people may say it's not "honorable" to deliberately make opponents high mid-fight with illicit substances but pish-posh. Acting with honor only specifies poisons and as we established drugs are not poison.

QED.

You're making your opponents last moments painless and happy, rather than forcing them to live through the painful process of disembowelment before they die.

I know, true paragons of righteousness here.

Glibness aside, I don't think it's that difficult to ask that when parsing these rules people use some common sense in their application. The literal computer code interpretation is more or less pure lunacy (Go ahead and try to explain to your GM you shouldn't fall for giving the evil Duke a tragic drug overdose because it's not poison) so we're forced to use our noodles to come up with something that makes sense and is ultimately playable. We've managed to move past the Dead condition not forbidding movement via common sense, I'm sure we can divorce a dishonorable act of poisoning vs giving a potential werewolf chemotherapy.

Grand Lodge

^^^^^this.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

This just in 99% of problems with Paladins are caused by GMs with a chip on their shoulder and a desire to make some kind of a point rather then anything the rules say or anything the Paladin did. Just once I'd love to see someone holding druids, warpriest, clerics, whatever to even a 10th of the same standard

Grand Lodge

3 people marked this as a favorite.

I have an alternate take on wolfsbane and paladins for y'all.

In a home game my friend is GMing, he had one of us get bit, and cursed. Surprise, it was the paladin! He has a whole system laid out on turning, resisting the turn at multiple levels, and what happens to the paladin if they can't control it, or only partially control it.

As a party we were able to obtain some wolfsbane. Sure, we did it through pretty shady methods, but me (wizard), and the Swashbuckler actually went to town to take care of that business. We do take the paladin code seriously, and as a party we decided to keep her out of harms way if we needed to bribe, cheat, steal, or whatever to obtain it. She sensed motive when we told her it was a quick and easy purchase, and that's just what she believed.

Through the use of the wolfsbane, the paladin was able to maintain a semblance of control, and kept a hold of her mind so she would not change into a chaotic evil beast.

The bottom line is, this made for a fun adventure, and by working together we were able to accomplish the short-term goals, and keep on track to beating the long-term threats to the very world!

Sure, the GM could have at some point cornered the player and tricked her into falling, but then she would have stopped playing, as her character is fairly wrecked, and the whole game would stop. Where's the fun for anyone in that? Please remember, we're all just doing this for fun, and that really should be rule #1 before any ruling. If you're a GM and want to pursue this particular case, consider a fun way to make it a part of the story, don't try to trick your players.

The Exchange

5 people marked this as a favorite.
Darksol the Painbringer wrote:

Welcome to Paladin Thread #981236576438976345.3Q. This is about how Lycanthropes can potentially make Paladins fall.

So, Lycanthropes are usually people afflicted with a curse. One of the ways to "cure" it is through Wolfsbane, an alchemical item that grants a reroll on the save of Lycanthropy. Another thing I noted is that Wolfsbane is, in fact, a Poison, and that each dose that grants a reroll in fact causes ability score damage (I believe it's Constitution), which means enough damage would kill them.

I remembered reading a clause that states Paladins cannot (objectively) use Poison, as it is against their code of conduct, and made me realize that if a low level Paladin tried to cure a friend afflicted with Lycanthropy, that he would end up having to use Wolfsbane if he wished his friend to be free of that curse.

However, as I've stated prior, Wolfsbane is a Poison, which Paladins cannot use, and if he tried to have somebody use it on his behalf, it wouldn't be much different than if the Paladin did so himself. So, if a Paladin tried to use Wolfsbane on his friend in any manner (which isn't a guarantee that it would work), would that be grounds for falling, even if he had the best of intentions with its application? He'd actually be more in trouble with his Paladinhood for trying to save his life than by simply ending his curse-addled existence by the pointy end of his sword?

No, it wouldn't be grounds for falling, because he wouldn't use poison. He'd help his friend make an informed decision about his medical options, thanks to the fact he has ranks in Heal because why wouldn't he? Of course he will spend time in prayer with his deity, asking for guidance, as he considers all of the options available. That would be the lawful good thing to do. He knows that wolfsbane is a potential cure, but that it is a poison with risks associated with it. With his heal check and some asking around, he also probably knows that wolfsbane costs about 500gp, while a potion of remove curse costs 750gp with none of the dangers. He also tells his friend firmly that he cannot become a lycanthrope permanently, because they are evil, and even with the best of intentions, cannot control their actions.

He is honest, as a paladin should be, and so informs his friends of all of his potential options to the best of his ability. Then he tells his friend that he strongly recommends the remove curse potion as the safer (if more expensive) option; he is worried after his friend's health after all. He even offers to work to help cover the cost of the potion, because he is a good character willing to do charity to help those in need.

If his friend suggests he would rather try the wolfsbane, then the paladin will assent, because while his code states in no uncertain terms that he may not use poison, it also is clear that he must help those in need, and he most certainly will not oppose someone attempting to cure themselves of an evil curse. He naturally then volunteers to be by the bedside while his friend attempts his operation.

The paladin will not use or administer poison during the procedure, of course. The victim of lycanthropy has no normal symptoms when it is not a full moon, and so can go and purchase the wolfsbane and ingest it himself without difficulty - it requires merely eating or drinking. The paladin, however, is there during the procedure to Treat Poison with his heal check in order to stop his friend from hurting himself with the wolfsbane, which any mortal or deity of the lawful and good nature would affirm is NOT "using poison", but is, in fact, the exact opposite of it. His deity will support him in this, because the Paladin is "using a healer's kit" and/or "using antitoxin", and is chanting prayers to his deity to save the life of the friend throughout the process.

Hopefully his friend is cured, and with the paladin treating poison, should go on to recover nicely. If he continues to suffer, then I see a plot arc gift-wrapped for the GM as they seek out the money or doing the service in exchange for a cure.

The scenario I described above is how I think it would play out in a way that would be true to the paladin's code. A paladin who cut corners, did not examine all of his options and pushes a poison down his friend's throat may still find his deity displeased with his rashness. As a GM, I would probably not make him fall for this the first time, but it would be grounds for visitation by an angel or messenger to caution him to do what is right, and not what is expedient.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

No, it wouldn't be grounds for falling, because he wouldn't use poison. He'd help his friend make an informed decision about his medical options, thanks to the fact he has ranks in Heal because why wouldn't he? Of course he will spend time in prayer with his deity, asking for guidance, as he considers all of the options available. That would be the lawful good thing to do. He knows that wolfsbane is a potential cure, but that it is a poison with risks associated with it. With his heal check and some asking around, he also probably knows that wolfsbane costs about 500gp, while a... etc etc

Best, response, ever.

Now i want to be a paladin. Sir, you really made the difference in this post. Excelent thoughts, beautifull answer and, truth be told, fantastic role playing point of view.

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Wolfsbane is a tall plant with blue flowers whose roots are used medicinally in small, diluted amounts (as they are toxic) as an analgesic and to regulate the heart. It is believed to cure lycanthropy,[1] and can be concentrated to form a powerful poison.[2][3]

So just because the herbs CAN be concentrated to make a poison doesn't mean that that the plants, as they exist , are a poison.


BigNorseWolf wrote:

Wolfsbane is a tall plant with blue flowers whose roots are used medicinally in small, diluted amounts (as they are toxic) as an analgesic and to regulate the heart. It is believed to cure lycanthropy,[1] and can be concentrated to form a powerful poison.[2][3]

So just because the herbs CAN be concentrated to make a poison doesn't mean that that the plants, as they exist , are a poison.

I really wish this would be the answer but in all fairness the bestiary does refer to the specific page where the poison is listed, and does state a dose. That unfortunately makes it pretty what you have to consume to get the second save.

151 to 200 of 219 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>
Paizo / Messageboards / Paizo / Pathfinder® / Pathfinder RPG / Advice / Paladins Falling on Lycanthropy All Messageboards

©2002-2017 Paizo Inc.® | Privacy Policy | Contact Us
Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours, Monday through Friday, 10:00 AM to 5:00 PM Pacific time.

Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, Starfinder, the Starfinder logo, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc. The Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Legends, Pathfinder Online, Starfinder Adventure Path, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.