some back of the napkin type example improvements I could think of in the armor department to help fix the system. Names are just throwing it out :)
lol... You just described what would quite possibly be the worst choice ever requiring an unheard of five feats (ewp,finesse, twf, twf katana+other) just to finesse twf with the weapon and don't even appear to realize it
I could be mistaken, but I always thought Kendo is preserved as sort of a formal/cultural thing rather than an actual combat style. I can't say I've seen many anim,e shows with characters that mimic kendo either with the exception of one actually about a high school kendo competition
What are your reasons for wanting to make it a light weapon? Personally I was really surprised and disappointed when I saw it in UC without the finessable tag that exists on the Elven Curve Blade, it really should have it :(. If your reason is to offhand wield it without penalty... that's what a wakazishi is for.
By (finally) confirming that you accept the fact that good & evil are not necessarily binary positions, you are once again going full circle and arguing with the point I made in the OP. Specifically the fact that the alignment system is flawed and should be updated to account for good & evil being more complex than pure black & pure white as it tries to paint them.
As to the idea of being able to change if you repent... It takes more to atone than simply repenting, especially when you are talking about unit731 type things
As to your claim that you need to be a complete sociopath or "evil" to ignore the suffering of others, I posted the stanford prison experiment earlier... the confessions of unit731's doctors over the years is another data point against the claim. Many of them were in a do or die situation and went through a rapid period of desensitization very similar to that of the guards in the person experiment that allowed them to continue on, but they have been haunted by the things they did since that time & have been trying to do what little they can to atone with themselves since.
As to your claim that fixing the system to account for the problems already pointed out and debated about over the last few pages... I notice you conveniently neglected to state those consequences in your post where anyone could do things like point out the benefits outweighing the drawbacks or explain any flaws in the claim... That's not the first time you've done that sort of thing in this thread either & it's getting old.
Sissyl uhh... huh? it's been pointed out previously that you keep trying to move the goalposts... You've tried it so many times that you just came full circle and accidentally supported my original point that the alignment system is flawed because it tries to remove the subjective nature from good & evil with your latest pure black example by specifically defining the act, the thought process, the reason, and the extent the "evil" person is intending to go in the "evil" act. It's obviously not possible to define everything evil down to that level for a game just to keep the concept of an absolute good/evil lacking any subjective nature in tact... the alignment system would have more pages than all content ever published for any version of D&D+Pathfinder ever published to even begin to account for things on that level of detail. in order to avoid the problem of a several thousand page alignment system and the ones already pointed out in the existing system, the alignment system should be adjusted to account for the subjective nature of good & evil.
I think the armor as DR optional rule makes for an interesting start of an idea that's not fully fleshed out yet & needs more components.
The fact that armor functions differently than core means that improved armorsdon't break the game as long as they don't improve that type's new strong point (heavy armor's DR/, light's potential defense class)
I think the real potential lies in a path towards building around the things that start to fall apart in epic play.
I want it, but I don't want them (Paizo) to feel rushed. I can wait.
This!...It's no secret that the d20 system starts to fall apart in epic content. Some f the optional rules like armor as DR open the door towards a first step that can potentially help with adjusting the problems to smooth out the transition (i.e. more armor types+the armor as DR thing). I'd rather wait & see a functional epic content implementation than one similar to 3.5's where things got progressively worse the further you go. Plus, they already somewhat account for it later, a lot of class stuff where you get something every Y levels after level X lacks the "up to level 20" that mostof 3.5 had.
Wrong, Wrong, Wrong...milgram, Stanford prison experiment Derren brown has a good recreation of the milgram experiment you can find on youtube easily enough if you want to see it in a modern repeat of the experiment.
But with that said and because someone brought up the atrocities from Japanese in the WW2 era... Lets talk about unit731... I assure you that it pales the baby in acid exanple already given. The most important part about it is the fact that much of what we know is due to ordinary people recollecting the activities of unit 731 rather than an Auchwitz>Josef Megele investigation where he at least tried to protect his experiments from some of the other problems going on there at the time & used things like anesthesia.
The prisoners that unit731 experimented on were referred to as logs as a result ofd the lumber mill coverstory of the loication.... They didn't even get the number that the stanford prison experiment prisoners got.
Spoiler:I considered going on without the detached safety of pure facts lacking context with recollections of some of the experiments from some of the doctors... But frankly, I didn't want to read it again & will lets folks do their own research. Sissyl & a few others have been trying to argue that context is unimportant and good/evil can be attributed to a series of absolutes that don't need to consider context for a while now, they should have no problems with explaining how it is not a result of the factors shown through the Milgram/Stanford prison experiments and how everyone involved was just evil once they keep reading.... Ishii & company make Mengele look like Santa...
is enough pressure from a figure of authority directed towards ~60% of ordinary people to kill another... you always have to think for yourself, the Alignment system discourages thinking.
Really nice post CunningMongoose. As to Sissyl, it's great that you finally acknowledge that there are grey areas, but given the admission... what exactly have you been attempting to argue all this time considering the OP was using Dexter as an example of why the alignment system's attempt to remove the subjective nature of concepts like good & evil is flawed and should be fixed to account for that to avoid the sorts of problems it causes.
I dunno how sissyl got "only shades of grey" out of what people were saying either. Just because it's not always a simple either/or equation doesn't mean it can't be black and white on occasion. Sometimes there is not even a choice too:
-guy gets a phonecall explaining how his wife & kids have been kidnapped and will be killed if he doesn't plant a bomb, if any attempt to contact or alert the authorities is made, they will be killed. if the bomb fails to detonate, they will be killed... there is no white choice.
- Same guy... instead of a terrible phone call The office building is on fire and he is trapped on the 23 floor with no hope of rescue or getting past the fire that has spread to corner him and a baby in this room right up against the window he broke to let in fresh air. The fire is getting closer & will get both soon... does he leave the baby to burn to death in agony with him or jump out the window with it for a quick death. Those are situations where you only ave a pair of grey options. As you can see, they are a bit more complex than the simple "murder is always wrong" example you tried to put out earlier when it was shown that there are exceptions to that overly simplified setup of yours.
Jus because it's not always a pure good/evil binary choice doesn't mean it can't be... just like sometimes you don't even have a pure good -or- evil choice.
The scifi version is best seen if you've seen the original, but it's decent due to the fact that it starts a little earlier in the timeline between he vampire/werewolf (names escape me at the moment), combined with he fact that it shows you the various events through the series from a slightly different perspective allowing for the injection of a bit of extra depth. Don't think of it as a remake, so much as a different attempt at converting the story of those three folks' lives in a television medium.
the scifi version goes into more and slightly different detail about things like the ghost and the "accident" that killed her, you get to eventually see how the werewolf/vampire me each other and decided to get an apartment together to look normal. Likewise with a lot of other things that are only even notable if you have seen the original
Closing arguments, they just have to show the flaws in the defense/prosecution for the jury... they don't even really have to be all that relevant (at least on tv). point out the flaws in your opponents as he situation warrants... regardless of the reality, criticze the sword technique and pronunciation of arcane words of power to your party, just say whatever comes to mind whenever it seems to fit;)
When is it acceptable?... I named two earlier, funny that you should rephrase it to specifically exclude them in multiple ways. It's even more amusing that one of those ways is barely even addressed by the alignment system unless very specific conditions are met to make it important.
In all honestly it depends on your GM.. either languages will be important and give you a real benefit and appreciated by your GM, they will be important because you need to speak with the creatures you summon, They will annoy your GM and he will use things you can't talk to whenever possible.Ask your GM what he thinks of you taking languages and if there are any in particular that he would like to see added to the group for his campaign if it's not already obvious what languages you will need to learn.
If your doing it to communicate with things you summon/create, what are you and what are you doing? Telling about your character/campaign even if you arent the summoning type could be useful too
ind some AD&D books and they have those rules along with dozens upon dozens of other edge cases that will make your head spin with all the "does anyone remember the rule for that" obscurity. There is a reason you don't see those rules in the common house rules listings...
Thank you, excellent post :). I think I've about got what I needed from the naysayers, they can congratulate themselves for making it easier and more likely for me to help with putting my considered idea dinto motion own the road by giving me a bunch of silly arguments I know that I know how to effortlessly kick out their supports without pause when presented to me or my rogue.
I guess they can be proud of themselves for helping to make sure the original idea can come to ligh-.. err... the warm shady embrace of darkness :)
I put your entire post in quotes because it was already pointed out as incorrect, I'll do so again and make it more clear this time since you put the effort into forming a potentially logical argument even if it does fail to take RAW into account, spoiler tags for size.
Code of Conduct:A paladin must be of lawful good alignment and loses all class features except proficiencies if she ever willingly commits an evil act.
Additionally, a paladin’s code requires that she respect legitimate authority, act with honor (not lying, not cheating, not using poison, and so forth), help those in need (provided they do not use the help for evil or chaotic ends), and punish those who harm or threaten innocents.
Associates: While she may adventure with good or neutral allies, a paladin avoids working with evil characters or with anyone who consistently offends her moral code. Under exceptional circumstances, a paladin can ally with evil associates[i], but only [i]to defeat what she believes to be a greater evil. A paladin should seek an atonement spell periodically during such an unusual alliance, and should end the alliance immediately should she feel it is doing more harm than good.
a supporter of Tyranny & Slavery willing to give you power to use against a shared foe supporting/engaging in death & destruction is certainly the lesser of the two evils since death & destruction tend to be a lot more permanent and difficult to undo than tyranny & slavery. A slave is still alive to be rescued and set free later, a corpse can not be however.
You really need to start reading the wording of some of the things you contest in your footstomping against the idea of paladins of Asnmodeus before hitting post... It's starting to look like you are throwing out horrifically flawed points just so they can be knocked down in support of the idea..
Horrific Epic Failure. The need to impose Tyranny is part of the antipaladin code! Milani "is the patron of all those who fight against oppression and unjust rule" did you even look at her before you made that silly post? You still need to find a shared enemy that is good though since killing anything evil would cause your antipaladin to fall by committing an act of good.
This... Plus I don't think it's been mentioned in the PHB/DMG since it said advanced dungeons and dragons on the cover... the omission of it and dozens of other bizarre edge case rules for planetary alignment situations was an improvement
I'm so going to enjoy my Anti-Paladin of Sarenrae now.
Looks like no, but for different reasons
Spoiler:I guess you could just ignore that flavor blurb and not do it... but lets kjeep going
Spoiler:She's NG & might take issue with the clah unless you can find a common enemy... heck.. your antipaladin would be a common enemy to LG Paladinsw, Sarenrae, and asmodeus... but maybe you could find an archdemon to grant you power... except there are no divine nes like asmodeus the archdevil is . I guess maybe Rovagug wqould offer you support... hmm... if only you could convince Asmodeus to give you the key and let him out from the prison that he himself sealed and keeps sealed... Oops... guess not!
Alignment: Chaotic evil
Spoiler:Pretty strict code,are you able to name a common enemy of Sarenrae anda CE anti-paladin that she has an active interest in getting rid of by employing /helping a CE antipaladin that she can not trust and could not deal withusing her own supporters/forces. Given her NG "do good things... because" thing I think it's going to be tough to find something to fit the bill, she'the antipaladin/Sarenrae duo is not at all analogous to the paladin/Asmodeus duo for lots and lots of reasons due to the stripping of law from the equation.. I guess you could try to find a CG god who has a a longstanding feud with a LG god... can't think of any though & killing an evil creature is a good deed by RAW ;).
Like I said earlier... Big A might be the only deity where the good/evil teamup can possibly work due to the whole devil/demon conflict thing and devils are technically the lesser evil since corruption can be resisted and healed a whole lot laser than the demon's death & distruction
I stumbled across a fun technicality in another thread (about paladins of Asmodeus) that shows a flawed aspect of the alignment system's wording. So long as you do not "debase", "destroy", or "kill" an innocent... it is perfectly fine to corrupt them and not an evil act. By that same token, it is not good/evil to purify that corruption. it's a shame that I can't edit this into the original post now...
Spoiler:Lets look into the fall:
Spoiler:An evil act... hmmm... lets check out what is evil...
Spoiler:Nope... looks like RAW still doesn't support you at all, The fact that RAW technically allows it thanks to a number of loopholes would please Asmodeus greatly going from what is known about him ;) You may feel that it "should" be evil and the fact that it is not woud be a flaw in the alignment system... but I have another thread about flaws in the alignment system that I'm sure would welcome you. Since you bring it to this point.... Technically corrtupting people is not even evil by RAW if it does not hurt, or debase, or destroy them!
Likely about as many of them as there were humans with deific levels in the 1930's. People are claiming that working for or gaining power from Asmodeus to use against a shared enemy in ways that ultimately benefits the goals of both parties is evil... However it is no more evil than the aforementioned teachers, doctors, and students/workers who were let into the topic when someone tried to play the shock value card hoping to illicit enough shock to stun people into speechlessness. If the mere act of working for/with someone evil against a common foe (influenza, illiteracy, demons, etc) is evil, then so are those Teachers, students, doctors and Sarenrae are as well using the exact same logic.
So, can you be a paladin of....STALIN?
Not being a scholar of 1930's era russian history, I went looking to see if there were any other not quite friendly states he gave support to because they were even more unfriendly to an enemy and found better It looks like you were trying to equate Stalin with Asmodeus... so lets go...
Spoiler:So were those teachers, doctors, scientists, and regular people getting job training evil? What about the people that learned to read? How far does one need to go in order to not be evil? Try to pick your shock value cards better next time, this level of sillyness is no fun at all. You just gave me the excuse to show a bunch of good real world people working (ultimately) for a person often considered to be "terrible".
Gaining power from an enemy due to a shared enemy is not necessarily serving or employing. We both have this here enemy, you have power, but are incapable of easily deploying it yourself in ways/places that I would be able to do easily" covers that fine... but lets clear something up... are you saying that Sarenrae working for & preaching for him when she worked with Asmodeus to seal Rovagug in the world to keep him from destroying it?
The spoilers say nothing about him not being evil, they say much about law and points out that they hold respect for aptitude and experience (i.e. competence) of a tool over mere power. A paladin is capable of doing things & going places a devil is not. It also shows that Asmodieus is willing to work with good in order to protect the world from destruction (also by RAW) using the Rovagug example. If a paladin of Asmodeus protects a village from being destroyed zombies or whatever, it serves the interest of both the paladin and the devils by preserving it from outright destruction just as Asmodeus himself did with Rovagug and the entire world. Asmodeus himself is the one who allows the paladin to even exist by keeping Rovagug imprisoned. with his (and only) key to release him stored safely where it can not be used by others.If he simply wanted to destroy, using the key would accomplish that.
RAW would show you as being mistaken about his evilness. I'm using spoiler tags to save space.
One cannot corrupt that which is destroyed.
I agree that the history got a whole lot more interesting. I have a feeling that the original owners are going to be some form of humans though given mumra's more twisted human than ape appearance and the animals he had enslaves were created that way. Given how things ended, it seems interesting that the planet would be left unvisited..."mumra's trapped on the planet... good! stay away & don't give him any tech to get off by landing a ship there!"
I once dated a rather kinky girl with a rape fantasy that wanted me to do so up to the point of giving me a recording explaining it and asking me to do so while saying that it was a completely desired and willing thing that I should not get in trouble for should anything go wrong if I were to accept and do go through with it for her (I didn't).
With regards to your"kill without good reason", that "good reason" is 100% subjective, as someone who signed a living will with conditions for when I want to have the plug pulled after a cerebral hemmorage where I learned what it was like to be trapped & helpless in my own body... I don't think anyone with a "never a good reason" argument has a chance in arguing that point. If it were legal to just OD me on morphine rather than just pull the plug, it would include circumstances for when do do that as well... anyone still thinking about arguing that point can bite me!
With the "lie with intent to harm" That is another subjective thing... Harm who? The one, or the many? What if it is not possible to be truthful with both without causing even more harm?
Grey area grey area grey area... One person's grey area is not necessarily another's likewise with good and evil. There are circumstances I would consider it an act of mercy to kill me, another might consider it a crime against humanity to do so and think that I should be kept alive as long as possible in a torturous state rather than granting me the desired mercy.
Asmodious is a special case. It works for him, and pretty much him specifically, because he is basically Lawful-[good is dumb... screw that rubbish] making the evil portion incidental simply because it practically rounds the decimal over to into evil. /the fact that he is amused by things like groups he disrespects worshiping him and people using the letter of the law/bargain/contract/etc to their advantage over those not bright enough to see the loophole makes him a nearly unique entity would would be interested in having a Paladin following him.
For reasons already stated, if the GM wants your book... your screwed. The best you can do is make it technically not something he would get by coincidence like a sinking ship or something. I like to use spellshards/Auron's spellshards from the eberron book to avoid this problem since it's a crystal... crystal get wet, so what! Improve hardness ()or whatever the spell I'm thinking of is called) is lowish in level and has a permanent duration allowing it to cover all but the most determined direct attack (i.e. you angered the GM and are screwed).
Who said anything about actively spreading his forces... fighting against the Abyss' forces (demons) is in the interests of both Asmodious and a paladin. Wiping out some NE zombies threatening the town is stopping the inadvertant spread of chaos the zombies were causing by threatening the safety of the town and both directly in the paladin's interests and indirectly in Asmodious' interests. Big A would even approve and be amused by that logic! Paladin gives amusement and is indirectly useful with the potential to be directly useful in his own fight against the abyss. Since pointing that useful tool at his incidental enemy (good) would diminish or potentially destroy its usefulness, doing so would not be worth the loss for the brief amusement it could grant.
Asmodious isn't too happy about things like chaos, disorder, or those "weak" enough to be fooled either. Not all of those concepts are things that are heretical for a core paladin to fight, Many of them actually go hand in hand with the things a paladin is supposed to fight more often than not. He's also the sort to understand and agree that the enemy of my enemy can be my friend and have a willingness to sustain that relation if it remains more beneficial than harmful to his plans. LE devils by RAW have fought against CE demons(?) since the beginning of time. The two are creatures of law/chaos who simply looked into the abyss long enough for it to look back and happen to be evil due to lack of a moral code thanks to that look.
edit:Just as the rogue views the paladin as being more useful to him than the potential danger/clash of having him around, Asmodious could see the same and throwing the useful tool away by sending it on a job that would have a high likelyhood of causing that tool to lose value would be a chaotic deed of simple spite as long as the tool continues proving itself to be more useful than not. Accepting that the tool has limitations and not using it against those limitations while it remains useful could be copnsidered more beneficial than the brief amusement gained by seeing that tool fall and lose value works great for an Asmodious type strongly focused on law with the evil portion just being incidental and barely applivable. It would fail miserably for a Zon Kuthon type where the weight on the LE scale is practically the exact opposite with strong evil & nearly incidental law.
The concept of Paladins of asmodious shouldn't be nuked from orbit, they should be given a "Thid class requires you to speak to your GM ansd see if Asmodious is willing to consider you useful enough to help guide you on a path that remains beneficial to both his interests and your own befiore taking it. GM's should not allow this class unless the campaign is planned to have a strong anti-chaotic-evil bent rather than just the usual anti-evil one" style footnote
I can think of several potential words, but don't think saying them would be wise for the health of the thread. Those who do think that way, should probably read Jim Butcher's Dresden files books. They have characters that range from Michael Carpenter (basically a real life paladin with a family & real world complications to deal with), to Harry Dresden who can pretty well be compared to David Tennent's Doctor (10th?) nicknamed the oncoming storm... Harry is a protector against the darkness who uses whatever reasonable things are required to get the job done when dealing with everything from werewolf type creatures to the Fae, actual fallen angels, outsiders, and corruption in his own organization but manages to do so in ways that cause both [spoiler1] and [spoiler2]to take an interest in his life (major spoilers there) along with a bunch of other folks who are just normal real world people doing their best to make things better along with the Lawful-(/n/A) fae who grow quite a bit from the first impression they seem to give the more you learn about them.1:
At least one actual named angel, not just some generic angel... he's in the bible by name
2:I warned you... Major spoiler from the tail end of ghost story(currently last printed in the series)
It's implied by someone who is incapable of telling a lie & would absolutely know but not directly stated that lucifer pushed harry towards a mistake.
The fae were pretty much my template for how I handle lawful outsiders, their nature is so incredibly different from ours that concepts like good & evil are not something they can even begin to understand. Turn someone into a hunting& keep them in your kennel with the other hounds?... what's wrong with that?... he'd be safe happy and well cared for through the rest of his life. What's not to like? The mindset of mortals (humans) is just as alien to them as their own mindset is to mortals. Over the course of the books, you start to understand their mindsets and come to realize they can be pretty nice folks within their limits. A LE devil could be pretty useful to a true neutral druid that wants to stop some force of chaos harming the forest... Given time, they might even learn each other's mindsets and be able to phrase to work well together given the limits of their underastanding oh the other.
Others have already explained why the time is ok, personally I don't think it's unreasonable considering your going for mithral rather than just plain enchanted armor. Plus I've never seen a game where anyone figured out the time to craft things beyond:
My biggest gripe with crafting is that the craft magic arms & armor/weapons feats. Basically they are pretty useless to most people who use those things because they don't have the needed spells to make anything. The people who have access to the spells however, are basically burning a feat so someone else can save money because they are crap with weapons and typically hurt by the ASF of the armor. They would be better off burning the feat on craft ring/wonderous item/staff/etc type feats they would actually benefit from.
The craft magic armor/weapons feats should probably be free once you have a certain number of other craft magic [thing] feats. Something like:
Yep, your assumptions about the paladin are correct, no special archtypes or unusual streaks as far as I know. if it ever came down to dealing with an asmodious type, I'm sure the GM might bring in some price for the rogue if he were involved, but that's a ways down the road given we are level 3 and the rogue's parentage is so far no more developed than "possibly".You hit the nail on the head with regards to the rogue though, he's pretty much out for himself with no interest in the paladin falling or in him not falling so long as it does not result in a loss in value or removal of his "tool". down the road if situations were different (and the player had shown interest in that road), then who knows... could be fun :)
Nice post, I like how you showed/explained the fate points in a way that isn't too likely to shatter brains... Usually you tell people they let the GM/players force stuff on the other with the option to spend a fate point to ignore it and their eyes glaze over followed by a hasty attempt to explain it trying to use d&d/PF terms/situations but desperately trying to put together some cohesion to it hehe
I agree with both of BigNirseWolf's points & quoted both posts because they tie into what I wanted to say
Comparatively, many of the traits are either over or underpowered for the exact reason he said, some of the "lame" ones like treating a choice of two less than awesome knowledge skill as a class skill could grant another skill point or three per level and give both while still be fine yet suddenly start to look like they are potentially as enticing as +2 initiative or something
Rather than things like +2 initiative or a bonus to hit/damage/crit/etc I decided to use my rogue's traits to shore up a party weakness (knowledge religion was the only knowledge skill!...). In doing so, his backstory went from:
Spoiler:with these traits
Spoiler:to this story after asking the GM about the possibility and him finding it to be a cool idea
I just wish the "sucky" traits were improved a bit to come up to being as potentially useful as the awesome ones, they could easily grant both skills and/or an extra skillpoint or two per level and still remain balanced while allowing low skillpoint characters to even consider them. The only reason the ones I picked would work out was because I had a reasonaably intelligent rogue with some extra skillpoints to spare so he could catch up after occasional fighter dips (thinking rogue18ish fighter2-3ish type thinking probably in the end).
Thanks for the info & nice post :) The rogue is pretty much LAWFUL-n/a so slots into LE since those red tapey bits of morality do not conflict with him if doing so bears him no inconvenience or risk wounding his pride. Nor do they or get consideration if doing so would give him the slightest inconvenience or result in a wound on his pride. :). Talking the talk for the paladin's useful presence outweighs the inconvenience of doing so. Laying out plans within plans for a fallback that helps preserve the paladin's usefulness should it diminish or be at risk of diminishing & causing inconvenience to the Rogue while the paladin tries to atone is simply a matter of protecting his investment. It also has the benefit of helping to keep things fun at the table with everyone happy :)
It's yet to be delved into in game so far & has been left up to the GM, but the scholar of the great beyond trait & conversation with the GM set his parentage with an imp or other devil as "possibly" his father giving excuse for the hyperfocus on the law portion of his alignment. :)
Excellent post :) I love the alternate mental descriptions. I have a LE rogue/fighter with traits that let him treat Knowledge Arcana, Dungeoneering, Engineering, & Planes as class skills since the group had no real access to knowledge skills and Scholar of the Great Beyond
Spoiler:combined with the 1 in a thousand imps with telepathy & beast shape II(bestiary page 78) plus a druid (wildshape)mother in need of power to help fix some "important" (pfft!... to a druid..) wrong caused by chaos where an imp demanded a child as payment in exchange. Wildshape+beastshape +the propensity for some of the more powerful devils to appear as other species magically combine into full elf with the not quite potential still left top the GM to ignore or integrate as he sees fit I've been playing him as big on lawful & sticking to the absolute letter of his agreements making the evil portion nicely fitting into a group with a CN cleric & LG paladin where the cleric is looking to be the biggest concern :P The slippery slope of Law sure is warm and inviting when dealing with those restrained by that red tape of "morality" :)
I also disagree with him, he is ignoring the fact that it simultaneously tightens the already loose aspect of paladins (Law) in the process of loosening the existing tight aspect (Good) going from a lG to a Lg in a way that is fitting with the deity's interests and character.
The amusing thing about a paladin like I described is that it's simultaneously both more and less restrictive at The same time and still requires them to do good. They work great for a lawful focused screw morality LE deity like asmodeus, less so for a Zon kuthon type more into the torture /evil aspet with law just sorta getting taped on over top of a chaotic lable... how is ZK even Lawful with Pain, Darkness, Loss Destruction, Evil, "Law" (law.. huh?)
Enevhar Aldarion wrote:
Yep, that article is no longer official and is not part of canon. So if you are playing "by the book" in Golarion, then your paladin must be LG and must be within one step of any deity he follows/gets his power from, limiting you to LG, LN and NG deities. If you are playing in a game where your GM allows you to house rule it into not having to do it that way, then of course you can. But as others have said, it has been retconned out of existence and there will never be any more info relating to it, and if that AP issue were to ever be reprinted, that info would almost definitely be removed. If it were not so much extra work for no extra profit, it would have probably already been edited out of the pdf.
technically we are't even playing in golarian, I as just hoping to find some info on the idea
That's disppointing to hear, I was hoping for something more developed/informational :(. Personally I think that Asmodeus would be happy t have paladins & they would be just as restricted (if not moreso)by following his code if it emphasized the Lawful aspect and reluffed to be anti-oathbreaker/chaos while forcing hem to remain true to the letter of their bargains/contracts and promote order over chaos whenever possible (rather that the good over evil). It could provide acharacter a good bit of depth i new & refreshing ways without the problem Wombat alluded to since the C* barbarian is still a useful tool for helping to promoting order despite his own personal chaotic disorder. maybe give them some bluff type skills and another point or two for skills (smite/protection from chaos isn't exactly as useful as evil, seems perfectly fair to give free)
Edit: it's the sort of thing hat fits perfectly with him too, he penned the contract of creation for the loophole'd power it was able to grant him by doing so even though it could technically be considered a good thing to do for the other deities :). having paladins out ad about promoting order when possible in the most positive (good) way they can see possible is a suitable tradeoff for the power it gives even though t ignores some of his portfolio sometimes. It's a slippery slope than only gets more slippery as they start flexing their freedom and bluff-type skills in more ad more creative ways :)
I'm in a game where my LE rogue is somewhat patterned after the way Jim Butcher presents he Sidhe (Prideful & not necessarily good or evil by human standards... but bound by the letter of their word & not subscribing to the human concept of "morality") In this game there is an amused GM and a paladin. he paladin voiced concern other the potential need for him to possibly go with a hellknight/antipaladin due to the he definately not-good CN/CG character's actions making him detect evil & realize the rogue was LE. the cross table discussion convinced the group that things would be fine for a paladin. I've so far embraced the letter of my word and bargains in ways that are both keeping with his alignment and convincing the Paladin the various ways he could do the most good... some examples:
In thinking about it I was pretty sure that I could continue with cheliax(?) style improvements to society without offending the paladin /7 accomplish a heck of a lot of good without changing my alignment or making the paladin fall... But as the devious plans within plans letter of the agreement style character the Rogue is, I was looking into the possibility of Asmodean Paladins (I think the Gm will be peachy with the idea) just to be able to lay some potential groundwork ahead of time. I found an old thread scorning some official mention of the idea being described, but not the idea... and was wondering if anyone knew where the idea was put out by paizo or how well it was fleshed out there?