Erk Ander's page

Give "Hair trigger" a -5 penalty to attack. That should power it down

The official hair trigger ability "Shot of Opportunity" only works at 30 feet at most. Changing Hair trigger to that would make it noticeably weaker ?

Furthermore I could see the feat moved to lvl 10 instead and Skirmishers get it at lvl 9 instead (mix places with its current lvl 9 feature)

I was thinking that Devastating Aim (DA) could be removed and instead added as choice ability at lvl 17. At that lvl u get Tactical Barrage (TB), a weaker version of ranger-flurry that can ONLY be used against ur mark.

But what if you u got to choose between TB and DA ? Either u get encouraged to use multiple attacks (TB) or use one single powerful attack (DA).

As it is now Devestating Aim is the best feat at lvl 4 and more or less becomes a nobrainer.

I was about to say that overwatch is Hair trigger but for suppressed enemies. BUT Overwatch allows the use UNWIELDY weapons. These weapons deal the most damage and tend to have the longest reach.

I wasn't aware of the That'll show em existance but its very useful reaction. So u make good points. SF2 has strong reactions across the board

I have said it before here. I think the "ranged attack" trigger is too much (it also makes feats Deflection fire and kill steal etc less interesting). Remove that and the feat more balanced. Maybe raise the lvl to 6+.

Yeah I know caster can still be targeted but thats a price they pay for standing in the open and casting damn spells.

Haven't done any playtesting yet, so take this with a grain of salt, but here is my impressions on the operative from my initial readthrough.

CLASS FEATURES

Aim
- I'm a fan of this being compressed into nearly all their feats, I do not want for the operative's turns to be Aim, Strike, Strike a lot of the time. Having them be able to use 2 actions to do their damage, and have 1 action spare, is a lot better in my opinion.
- Aim currently patches up the Operative's otherwise terrible damage from level 1-3 (ranged weapon no stat mod), however as you level up the Operative effectively has 2 damage boosters - Sneak Attack and Fighter's increased proficiency. Effectively they lose the +4-7 from strength to gain +1-5d4 (+1-5d6 with a feat).

Where dud you get 5d4+1 from ? I thought Aim granted 4d4 ? Also doesn't both Gunslingers and ofc fighters get increased prof ?

Hmm but are sure it needs to be balanced ? IS is that bad ? The systems are vastly different in terms of what they can acheive and at what lvl.

That the class is better than gunslinger with guns is no doubt imo (due to aim damage bonus and some better feat compression). Its role is damage dealing and few classes have such clear purposes.

My issue is it taking bespoke class features, or damn near bespoke class features, from other classes. More over the operative equivalent of reloading+moving actually stacks with the gunslinger's as per raw. Operative's calls out any time you interact to reload, gunslinger has bespoke reload actions. If you take gunslinger dedication you can combine these and get weird nonsense like striding twice. I'm personally fine with fighter accuracy here, but I can see it going or being limited to after taking the aim action. Mainly it's just eating too many people's lunches. I'd like to see the class chill tf out a little

It doesn't need to add sneak attack dice, have fighter accuracy, be very mobile, get a fantastic reactive strike equivalent and later down the road also get the flurry edge. It doesn't need to do *everything*

Except apart from +2 to attacks the Operative never took any features, TActical Barrage existed on the operative in Sf1, sneak attack exister in SF1 as well.

The quadruple threat of fighter accuracy, sneak attack, hair trigger and eventually flurry edge is just way too much and I think wildly inappropriate. Class is just eating the whole pie of ranger, rogue, and fighter, gunslinger too honestly

I am going against the grain here. Its certainly true that it gets stuff from several classes but all of those features (apart from the +2 attack that fighters get) are notably weaker versions of said class features. I could see it lose out on fighters +2

Given the flavour as main damage dealer it makes every so much sense it has such features. Its the specialisation of the class. Its very identity.

I think the class is certainly overtuned, but arguably worse than that, I feel the class is all over the place in regards to flavor, or at least how that flavor is represented by class mechanics. I get that the operative used to be rogue in space back in SF1e, but with the shift into a more gunslinger-y approach I think things like the d4s from aim, on the move (and its improvements), specialized skill set, and tactical barrage don't belong with the new operative identity.

I completely disagree that flavor is everywhere. Its quite specific actually. Also Given that there is a ranged "meta" and guns are the standard weapons it makes all the sense for it to be more gunslingy (in fact all classes should lean into that) and the "d4s from aim, on the move (and its improvements), specialized skill set, and tactical barrage" not only fit but make sense. It also meshes with the SF1 operative who had "tactical barrage" (though much much earlier) and superior movement and and "sneak attack" (trick attack).

I also don't entirely like the fact that operative has fighter proficiency scaling because that means its going to be just a direct upgrade from the gunslinger in every way. I think it would be way more interesting for the operative to have regular martial proficiencies and have a chassis more similar to the swashbuckler and build around one strong attack per round. That or have the class built around debuffing like a ranged rogue with debilitating injury.

You are describing the rogue but in space. Thats boring and not creative at all. And above all not the concept of the operative.

I think what you guys are doing wrong is comparing it with PF2e (too much). Yes the systems share alot and should interchange some stuff but they are not the same nor balanced to be the same. There are spells that were high lvl in PF that are much lower in SF. There are items that were high lvl and rare in PF but common in as fcuk in SF. So comparing apples and tomatoes might not be the best thing

The class should be compared with Sf2 classes first and foremost and then the classes in PF2e. The PF2 classes have all gotten buffs so I think we should also take those into account. Also the Gunslinger is terrible. And the swashbuckler is very complex which the operative is not meant to be and the strenght of its one attack is questionable. Aim is after all precision damage so it won't be good against undead and robots (presumably).

My issue is "hair trigger". Its needs fixing. My proposal right now is to remove the "ranged attack" trigger. At least as a start. That also gives the feat "Deflection Fire" and its upgrade a reason to exist.

-> Bullet Fever (14th) - While the idea is cool, is it really a good idea to give the player a feat that encourages them to (even unintentionally) try to kill their character as often as possible? Because with those downsides it is a gamble if that character even makes it through the next round without fully dying.

I see it more as a last ditch solution its not something u will intentionally aspire to but boy are the enemies going to get surprised at their moment of triump. Its very cinematic as well.

Perpdepog wrote:

Karmagator wrote:

-> Hair Trigger (2nd) - hahahaha

I guess a saving grace is that operative has no ability to gain extra reactions

Um... Have you looked at Operative's level 20 feats?

Indeed but it competes with a really good lvl 20 feat. The choice is difficult

Hair triogger should not be triggered when you an opponent does a ranged strike. It sort if invalidates some other operative feats. As such is to remove that trigger.

There's an Azlanti human heritage in the Playtest Rulebook :)

Wow thats awesome I would hug you if I could. Virtual hug instead

Will the Azlanti humans have their own stats now ? Or are they regular boring humans ?

I love how Paizo isn't afraid of advancing the story. Pulonis joing the PW while Veskarium is at war with the Azlanti is no small amount of drama

Razmir does have an entry in Divine Mysteries...

I maintain Shelyn is safe because her not being so would be a PR train wreck for Paizo.

Thats a not a good enough reason for her to stay. She isn't very unique for one

Desna, friendly happy butterfly lady of dreams and travelers and the stars. Some demon lord Aolar starts killing clerics of various gods and gets around to those of Desna, and she responds in her peaceful hippy way by fluttering down into the Abyss and ripping his face off.

At least one other god (Calistria, it's rumored) had to save her from dozens of angry demon lords, outraged that she thought she could just flutter down into their home and murder one of them!

I just love that she's close to the last god you'd expect to go defcon 5 on the Abyss, and yet, there she went!

Desna's definitely my favorite of the 'Big 20.'

Well it wasn't that she needed saving but rather that Calistria averted planar war by making sure the coalition of Demon lords turned on each other. Sarenrae and Shelyin also helped out. Would be cool to see those godesses take on the Abyss.

But yeah Desna is based. I liked that she just decided sometrhing needed to be done and did it. I am not sure why full Deities allow the Demon lords to act up.

I really HOPE they dont make Holy/unHoly (and their weaknesses) pure polar opposites like in vanilla 2e.

What I mean is that I hope they take into account how the different concepts differ due to their nature. Unholy should be decent against pretty much anything while Holy is only good against fiends etc. So unholy is relatively easy way to gain power and damage (just be evil, support evil or powerhungry). Holy is powerful against fiends but pretty much useless against other targets and demands more from the user (it easier to be evil than to be good).

Not sure I am being clear. Its too late overhere

Major props for revising some stuff from the core-book. I really respect that. Also Hopefully feats will be less situational this time

This is some excessive measures. Yes I understand that none of the content that Paizo themselves make shall include AI-content but to bar others is overreach

Here is an example of a nonvancian caster. I detest vancian casting.

Either its pretty good. Its more like 5es casting in some regards. It also cexists, for the bard, druid, sorc and cleric

https://www.reddit.com/r/Pathfinder2e/comments/e4b5bt/update_13_neovancian_ alternative_casting_classes/

I made a comment about this ages ago. To summarize, it makes no sense imo that evil and good are simply polar opposites in terms of how they cause damage. Angels etc are extra weak against evil energy and Fiends extra weak against Good ebergy. But thats sort of shallow view of alighment based damage. Evil and Good are more than just complete opposites. Evil is far more indiscriminate than Good is. As such everybody is equally vulnerable to evil damage regardless of actual alignment. Good damage on the other side tends to be more controlled and deliberate as such evil takes full damage, neutral takes half damage and good takes no damage.

At least thats how I think it should have been

Well my wish is sort of to late. The game is in my opinion suffering from feat bloat. There are near two dozen classes and an at least 40 feats for each class. Not only are there way too many classes (just make them archtypes of subclasses of actual clases) there are way too many feats of which 90% are less than useful due to being so conditional.

So what do I want I would wish for more quality over quantity

Nice

There is a guy called Data-something that came up with a great fix to your problem. He balanced all casters because of this.

This is great and the way it supposed to be imo.

Have to say I love an iconic that that is fairly mature (agewise) and a parent as well. Cool

For myself, I'd love to just go down the list of nations:

Osirion: Hooooo boy. Osirion is my single least-favorite place on Golarion.

I agree that Osirion is not very original

With that said note every region needs to LG wholesome. Some regions like Katapesh are going to to be unpleasant by moderns sensiblities. And if you look at cultures that inspired Katapash or Qadira slavery was everpresent. Katapash is meant to be what its meant to be, not every region has to be unproblematic. Thats why you have Andorans fighting against slavery and other injusticies over there (Which the Okeno Pirates hate). Much like the Worlwound its not a pleasant place not meant to be. Its a symbol of what can happen if wealth is the only thing that matters and you are willing to sell you parents to get it.

Conflickt between Taldor and Qadira has nothing remotelyto do with Crusades. Absolutely nothing. The Crusades was a multinationell and religiously motivated conflict. Qadira vs Taldor is not.

Martialmasters wrote:

that makes me think they are strictly weaker in combat that a barbarian/fighter or rogue while having minimal ooc utility, a investigator meanwhile has great potential for ooc use.

still like the flavor of swashbuckler however

Well, they have more mobility than anyone but the monk. They can dart about the Battlefield with little concern for AOO (vexing tumble) and more speed than a mobility rogue or shield fighter.

Their AC is 1 less than a shield fighter and with buckler dance better than most melee. Their damage with panache is on par with most dps and some options allow them to have insane dps (impaling finisher, dual finisher, bleeding finisher).

Starting at level 10 with derring do, they're the unmatched masters of acrobatics and their respective trade. A gymnast is the best character there is at tripping/grappling, a braggard is the best at intimidating. It's not even close.

Meanwhile, a wit swashbuckler can give every turn +4 to a friend's attack while gaining panache.

Bah, I wasn't convinced at first but now I think they're pretty strong.

According to calculator I posted their DPS is just below Fighter and Barb most times. Finisher or not. Havent calculated or seen it any calculations with Rogue or Ranger

Here is a calculator for DPR for the Swashbuckler

https://www.reddit.com/r/Pathfinder2e/comments/db6rxi/website_for_calculati ng_pathfinder_2e_average/

It's a complicated question. AoO (which I know more) happens very rarely if the party is not built for it. Something like 10-20% of the time. If you have a character who specializes in tripping, it gets suddenly closer to 30-40%. So it's very party dependent.
Opportune Riposte is more monster/DM dependent. On a first attack, it will trigger 5% of the time (same level enemy). On a second attack, 25% of the time and on a third attack 50% of the time. So, if your DM loves hit and run monsters, ranged attackers, spellcasters and such, it will happen quite rarely. But against stupid brutes, it happens a lot. 3 attacks from a brute will trigger one with more than 50% chance. If it's a lower level brute, you will trigger it nearly for sure.
So, because there are 2 variables it's hard to compare AoO and Opportune Riposte. But at least Opportune Riposte is not party dependent. And if you end your turn next to a lower level monster, you can be pretty sure it'll trigger it once. Then, monsters will understand they should not attack you, but it's not bad not to be attacked, too.

Hmm is AoO really that party depedent ? Doesn't it greatly depend on the DM and moster as well ?

Also even if point about stupid brutes is take into consideration it would take 6 attacks over 2 turns to be guaranateed a riposte. Thats not something you want optimse over say usage of Charmed Luck that will pretty much happen way more often

Overall I like it. But you are truly overestimating opportune riposte, Charmed Life or even AoO are more likely to occur than a critical failure. Its nice when it happens (for various reasons) but its not super likely. And hardly somehting you can count on. Unless you somehow can get extremly high AC (hard due to AC increases being very limited) or fighting very weak enemies all the time (GM dependent)

For spontaneous casters its HUGE nerf as I can only heighten spells by using signature spell. This only allows one spell per spell level attained. So if I take Fey bloodline for example I lose out on 3 bloodline spells if I do not take signature spell at 1rst, 2nd & 16th levels for these spells. In addition I have to cast each spell at its highest level to effect equal level opponents. It seems like a HUGE tax for a few spells that opponents will likely make their saving throw

In care you like alternative spellcasting I would suggest Datalores Homebrew. ITs very good (I only disagree with opposed schools and not Sorc not getting a little more stuff). I would suggest you try it out before you mess with Incapacitation. I agree with you that it really makes some spells useless. But I also understand its existance.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Pathfinder2e/comments/e4b5bt/update_13_neovancian_ alternative_casting_classes/

Erk Ander wrote:

Rogues and Swash have the same saves and the same AC. The Swash get 1 hp more per lvl. So the defenses are the exactly the same and Swash get at most 20 more HP. Not exactly squishy.

It's +2 HP per level, actually (so +40 HP eventually, a pretty meaningful number). Swashbucklers also have vastly increased mobility...which translates directly into getting attacked less if you use it right.

They also have much better defensive Feat support (specifically, Charmed Life is a great Save buff, and they have a bunch of high level defensive stuff, most notably Dueling Dance and Incredible Luck).

Sorry +2. The Rogue is more likely to have a higher CON than the Swash due to being a very SAD class and not needing str for damage.

Vastly is a exaggeration, yes the class is faster on par with the monk. And yes Charmed life is nice and its big brother (incredible luck) even nicer. Though it forces the class to upgrade CHA (at least 14) just to use those feats.. But that pretty much it in terms of saves. Dueling Dance is a multiclass feat or 2 away.And its decent.

But if get down to it the Rogue gets debuff that aid the entire party something insane.

The point still stands the class-chassis is only slightly sturdier than rogue. However I belive its much to early to say that Rogue is objectively better. Lets things marinate

It's easier to get Panache than it is to inflict Flat-Footed, FWIW.

But the main difference is that while rogues can pile on the damage as well as any martial, they are pretty squishy and have poor defenses. The Swashbuckler is as sturdy as the fighter or ranger.

Rogues and Swash have the same saves and the same AC. The Swash get 1 hp more per lvl. So the defenses are the exactly the same and Swash get at most 20 more HP. Not exactly squishy.

Fighters get the Agile grace feat (which quite frankly Swashbucklers should get as well)

Mudfoot wrote:

We know that Rovagug is the most powerful god there is. So is it unreasonable to believe that he manipulated Saranrae into making the Pit?

This is pretty explicitly canonical, having been stated outright a few places.

Hmm, I think Jacobs has said Pharasma is the most powerful with Rova being numero dos.

Where does it say he manipulated Sarenrae. Also Sarenrae has a temper doesn't make here evil.

This is a very good question. And yes he partially answers it.

But how does Pharasma the most powerful deity deal with this ? This is obviusly wrong or illegal (much like undead). And how do the good deities deal with this ? Its not like you can sacrifice evil souls to the good planes. Ang why do es lawful evil Asmodeus allow these acts (there is at least on AP where this happens)

Is once per encounter really that powerful, also note you have far less spellslots than in prior editions. I think this a kneejerk reaction from some folks again.

Set wrote:

And were there others? A 'Charlie's Angels' setup requires three 'angels' to Aroden's 'Charlie...' :) They've got a tank (Iomedae), a caster (Arazni), so perhaps a skillmonkey? (Ah yes, secretly Norgorber is a goddess under that cowl, and the third of 'Aroden's Angels!'

Until the death of Aroden in 4606 AR, the goddess Milani was simply one of dozens of saints within the Last Azlanti's faith. She was the beacon of hope to all those who fought against repressive regimes, giving courage to those who had little but their desire to live a free life. The death of her patron, combined with the tremendous upheaval and suffering that followed his death, gave her a focus and attracted many new followers. Those devoted to her found the courage to organize the rebellions against the infernal takeover of the Chelish Empire, helping many of her outlying territories break free of its control. They fought against the slow slide into barbarism, restoring people's hope that a just and good society could be restored. Milani has never been as popular as Aroden's other followers, such as Iomedae, perhaps because the Inheritor's worship had already been firmly established before their patron's passing.

The interesting thing is that Milani is Chaotic Good, so a pretty far cry from Aroden's Lawful Neutral. Although she's working together pretty well with Iomedae these days.

In PF1, Milani had the Rose Warden prestige class associated with her, which was really well-suited to put on top of a rogue...

Having read about Milani in Inner sea Faiths. she feels FAR more like NG than CG. Quite frankly I think that what she should have been. IMO

1) Respectfully, the main mission statement is the protection of Golarion's native species. That's their like actual job.

2) Well, we don't know specifically if it is a crime or not but we also haven't seen an actual Hellknight NPC yet, let alone one in the Pact Worlds.

3) True. Fair point. But there's a big difference between a shaking up a bad neighborhood and military action against rampaging space monsters.

4)...yeah we actually don't.

1) https://starfinderwiki.com/sf/Knights_of_Golarion

2) There are Hellknioght NPCs in Pact World. We don't spefically know if murder is a crime either. My point is there are several bounties on the Pirates and the Stewards are said to use bounty hunters to deal with criminals. They themselves are said to deal Harshly with Pirates. Why would the now use "Boounty Hunters" like KoG or HK ? Seems weird.

5 Indeed if the Pirate HQ was only a bad neighbourhood and not the HQ of well Pirates that make space unsafe.

A couple of points from the lore:

1) The KOG is mainly concerned with protecting the endangered species of Old Golarion and therefore it is implied that their focus is further out in space.

2) The Hellknights are brutally committed to Order and thus would loathe the Free Captains...they would also loathe breaking the law and as far as we can see, the Pact Worlds are the direct jurisdiction of the Stewards.

3) Based on what I remember from the Starfinder Wednesday briefings by the developers: both the Hellknights and the KoG have "client" worlds in Near Space who support them. For the KoG, these are friendly caretaker style relationships. For the Hellknights, it is a brutally well enforced contractual obligation (like the Peacekeepers in Farscape). This means that both organizations have bigger fish to fry.

4) The Stewards are a well funded but relatively small paramilitary-style law enforcement organization and are probably not prepared to untangle the rat's nest that is the Diaspora.

5) The people in the Pact Worlds who would like to show up to stop the Free Captains are the Pact Worlds Military which is made up of fleets that are in service to their homeworlds but gather together to defend the Pact. The PWM probably includes ships from Eox.

6) There are many, many, many, many, many, many good reasons why certain sovereign races in the Diaspora would very much like to not see a fleet that includes Eoxian military vessels showing up with their guns drawn.

1) KoG is about spreading justice anf fighting evil. And they also protect the defenseless or innocent all over. Specifically in the Pact Worlds. So kickinh pirate-ass is defintely on their agenda

2) Attacking the Pirates holds in the Diaspora is hardly a crime. The Stewards literally put bounties on pirates and criminals so why would they object against the HK ?

3) The bigger fish might as well be their homesystem. Thats why they fought against the Swarm, Veskarium etc

4) We don't really know how large the Stewards are but I can't see why the would have resources or the inclination to deal with the HQ of the systems Pirates. Especially since they if any could convince the Pact world planets to muster their armies and deal the deathblow to the Pirates.

On top of that, the Vesk would not obliterate a civilian population no matter how many pirates they could eliminate. That wouldn't be honorable. And the Stewards, well, like the UN peacekeeping forces, they do condemn piracy, and they probably help fight piracy in specific locations (just like UN Resolution 2442), but to eliminate piracy completely is not within the scope of their power to do so (they don't have that many Stewards or resources at their disposal with everything else they do).

So as you can see, there's lots of reasons why Broken Rock still exists even if it is well-known.

The Vesk have conducted Genocide at least twice and some of commanders are more than willing to kill civilians. After all whats honorable is debatable.

The Stewards deal harshly with the most bloodthirsty Pirates according to sourcebooks as an example for others, this might mean that they accept some piracy given that its not cruel or overly violent. They probably do have resources and power for it though. They have huge net of allies that could aid them in attacking the Pirates. It might thus be that they allow the existance of it because they can monitor and survey it as well gather all the scum of the galaxy in one place.

But it does not make sense that KoG, Hellknights, Stewards and others know the location yet don't blow it to hell/heaven. I always playes it as them NOT knowing where it is. Or that HQ is like a town of ships that move every now and then.

Since we haven't seen them on Golorion before, it is time for the hidden kingdom of the metallic kobolds. I look forward to some Wakandan/Themyscian style arrogance: it is not your fault that your metal work is so poor, you are just a dwarf, but, take heart, it is levels about the cheap limericks elves pass off as poetry.....

Thats pretty cool idea

Full spec is no where near as deadly for Operatives as many belivve it to be. The classes that outdamage the operative (without full spec) still do even with full spec. IT would be much better to just errata that smalls arms gain full spec and be done with it.

That would be great, still surprised they don't "exist".

it should be noted, that one of the survey questions in the playtest was this very question, and the vast majority of respondents wanted the magic system kept intact.

I can defintely see that. And I understamd Paizo choice. people are a litle wary of "new" stuff even if it way better. Dnd5e left the traditional Vancian and most people approved of it.

I am fairly sure Paizo will release a supplement with a different magical system.

As of now having to learn a spell on several spells lvls as sorc is frustrating (you only have 9 signature spell) and as time goes on more will notice it. SAme thig with Wizards and having to prepare a spell on several slots.

In my view, spontaneous casters have a limited number of spells in their repertoire and it is very hard to change them, but they should have full control over how they use them by spending any slot they want on them. By contrast, Prepared casters should have a lot more choices in their spells each day, but how they use them is more limited (thus keeping the need to prepare the spell at the higher level, and losing the spell when it is cast unless you prepared multiples of it.) If "prepared casters" could freely heighten spells the way the spontaneous casters can AND freely change their memorized spell list every day, then what makes them "prepared", and why would anyone ever choose to play a spontaneous caster?

I think those 2 abilities need to be the divider between the 2 casting types: Do you want to freely change your spells every day OR do you want to freely heighten the limited spells you always know? Pick 1.

Spontaneous caster can only freely heighten their signature spells of which they have at most 9. So the free heightening would improve Sorcs and Bards as well. Also the reason you choose Sorcs is because you have your entire spell-list at hand at all times and you can cast more spells. Given that most spells are situational at best down-right useless at worst having say 35+ spells in your repetoire is prettyu damn good.

The more I read your stuff (the new classes) the more I realise how seamless and intuitive it is. Much more fun to play. I would probably never bother to play regular sorc or wizard. Apart from the Specialist having two opposition classes (I found that a little exessive) you Mage is perfect. Once again thank you for creating this. I will try to spread the good word of this creation.

James Jacobs wrote the entry for Nocticula, but I think I can explain some of the reasoning, or at least the reasoning for another god that had similar alignment questions (Apsu). The logic for them not sponsering redeemer champions involves specific clauses in each god's commands that don't mesh well with the concept.

Nocticula (Edict): "Punish those who take advantage of offered trust and shelter."

Apsu (Paladin Code): "Mercy is offered, but only once. Should I be betrayed in my moment of kindness, I will not stop until I have put my enemy down."

Now, you could argue that offering mercy once and then hunting someone to the ends of the earth technically doesn't violate the redeemer's code; certainly, the Cult of the Dawnflower made that argument. But then, they made Sarenrae so angry she doesn't even accept neutral followers anymore, so your milage may vary.

If I may, nothing in the Redeemer tenets nor even in Sarenraes contradicts the above edicts (which you mention). The above edicts do not prohibit nor discourage mercy only that mercy being betrayed means you have all rights and even possibly obligation to rectify the mercy given. The Redeemer only demands that you give a chance. If that chance is abused you are reasonably withing your rights to act with violence.

This is the tenets in question below

You must first try to redeem those who commit evil acts, rather than killing them or meting out punishment. If they then continue on a wicked path, you might need to take more extreme measures.
You must show compassion for others, regardless of their authority or station.

And one of Sarenrae anathema is "failing to strike down evil". If you give mercy to a murderer who then continues down that path you are responsible for that and if you fail at redempition as well killing said murderer (you may decide that you failed after the first and proceed to violent acts) than you are causing anathematic act.

Granted you are insider and I am not so you obviously sit on info I lack. AS with all theological discussion one can have very different view especially given that Sarenrae allows ALL GOOD alignments. So I definitely understand where you came from (despite lacking the information and knowledge you possess).

Personally I see Nocti as deity of the those that take their own path in life which includes redemption but isn't restricted to it. Redemption in specific is Sarenrae