|
In a recent game, an player showed up with a Monk/Barbarian multiclass character.
Question of legality in PFS play arises:
Since there are few penalties or repercussion should a character change alignment is it totally ok for a Lawful monk to change alignments to non-lawful and take up the barbarian class (or vice versa).
What are the repercussions to the character and to PFS play for these types of builds. In normal campaign play the GM has lots of scenario hooks for players who did/do such actions and there can be repercussions, but in organized play this seems rather .... "chipmunk/cheese".
Is there an official stance on this, or is it "Oh well, game on garth"
Thanks
I addressed this issue in February in this thread. Here's the relevant quote:
In the RAW, the barbarian no longer has an ex-barbarian entry. I do have some concerns about folks (specifically in an org play environment) just willy-nilly changing their alignment, but I'm not sure if those concerns warrant me doing anything about them.
I will warn the OP, however, that the line in the rage that says you can't use any ability that requires patience or concentration is open to interpretation by any GM you sit down with. So you could eventually be a Barbarian 1/Monk 7 who needs to use wholeness of body while raging to survive and the GM could feasibly say, "You can't use wholeness of body while raging." which could necessarily mean character death. I'm not going to go through the entire core classes section and list every ability that, in my opinion, requires patience and concentration, but keep in mind you're leaving your entire concept pretty much open to interpretation by any GM you play with.
Relating to the old post from Josh first. That is really out of date because the current (4th) printing of the Core Book does have a section on ex-barbarians, copied here for those with an older printing:
A barbarian who becomes lawful loses the ability to rage and cannot gain more levels in barbarian. She retains all other benefits of the class.
As for your question, while I do not think I have ever seen a specific, official answer, I would think it could be done only at the beginning or end of a scenario, regardless of leveling up, along with a valid reason why. Whether that reason is for fluff or mechanics, or both, would not matter, so long as it is valid.
|
"Valid" reason?
<dwarf barb1/fight2 takes monk[flowing] at 4th along with Improved Reposition; next day encounters some bad guys...>
Bad guys: "Charge!"
Dwarf: "Immediate-action Improved Reposition opportunity maneuver to line you two idiots up for a Cleave! My turn! Rage! Power-Att..."
Bag guys: "Hey! You can't rage; you're a lawful monk now!"
Dwarf: "But that was yesterday; today is today; and I'm not at the dojo where I have to follow Master Plankupbutt's rules. Truth be told, the only reason I went to Shylen's Glaive Seminar in the first place was so I could lecherously leer at the pretty girls -- but I did manage to pick up a trick or two while there in an unaccustomed state of complete sobriety...ugh, that was terrible; lemme fix that... <move-action swig booze> ....RAGE-PA-CLEEEAAAVE!"
|
Reread the errata.
By becoming lawful you lost the ability to rage. I didn't see anywhere something along the lines of atonement that gives you rage back. Let me know where this is written. Until then you have issues at my table trying to rage.
Your rage is gone by entering monk school. You trained hard to lose ut and to perfect yourself. Congratulations - you succeeded.
Constant change of alignment just tries to find a loophole to get around the errata. Monk and Barbarian are just not ment to be compatible.
Why else would there be the extra addition he can't get more levels in barbarian if all you need is a quick alignment change before levelling up.
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
Thod speaks wisely. A barbarian who becomes lawful (to pick up that monk level) can switch back to a chaotic alignment if she pleases, but she will never be able to rage again.
To avoid that fate, either start your adventuring career as a monk and then start hanging around the raging berserkers at the Pathfinder Lodge commisasary, or grab Ultimate Combat and take the Martial Artist monk archetype, which doesn't have alignment restrictions, and stay chaotic.
|
|
Thod speaks wisely. A barbarian who becomes lawful (to pick up that monk level) can switch back to a chaotic alignment if she pleases, but she will never be able to rage again.
To avoid that fate, either start your adventuring career as a monk and then start hanging around the raging berserkers at the Pathfinder Lodge commisasary, or grab Ultimate Combat and take the Martial Artist monk archetype, which doesn't have alignment restrictions, and stay chaotic.
I resent your prejudiced stereotypes.
|
|
This issue is a bit ambiguous within the rules.
Yes, a Barbarian, by RAW, who becomes Lawful loses Rage.
There is nothing that says a Barbarian who loses Rage can ever get it back.
As such, I would expect some table variation on this.
Any GM would be within his or her rights to allow or disallow Rage, even though the alignment has been changed back to a non-lawful alignment.
At my table, I would disallow it.
You may not agree with my reasons, but as a GM in PFS, you have very limited ability to deal with cheese and loophole hunters. You often just have to deal with it, because the RAW allow for that build. In this case, it is ambiguous enough, that as a GM I would take a stand to stop the cheese.
EDIT: Alignment should be a major part of who your character is--indeed a defining part of their personality. Changing alignment should be something that is not done lightly, should be stressful, and IMHO shouldn't be allowed in PFS. Sure, you can come up with whatever story you want to, to justify the first change in alignment, and subsequently even the second. But this sort of change should be limited to home games where the GM can actually create dynamic and catastrophic circumstances that would call for said character to actually question their own belief system and code of honor to such a degree that they make a drastic personality change.
|
By becoming lawful you lost the ability to rage. I didn't see anywhere something along the lines of atonement that gives you rage back. Let me know where this is written. Until then you have issues at my table trying to rage.
There is nothing that says a Barbarian who loses Rage can ever get it back.
Restore Class: A paladin, or other class, who has lost her class features due to violating the alignment restrictions of her class may have her class features restored by this spell.
|
|
Agreed - Attonement should be possible in principle. But a barbarian entering monk school would qualify as deliberate misdeed - incurring 2500 GP.
Also if you read the spell - it surely isn't ment as a simple back and forth change alignment. Gods will get tired quickly if you try this multiple times and claim - but this time I'm truly repentant.
If you change alignment with the goal to change it back already planned than it is an auto-failure according to the description.
Off course - how to you define "truly repentant". And as I said above - it should be 2500 gp as it clearly is a deliberate act and not a compulsion.
Atonement
School abjuration; Level cleric 5, druid 5 Casting Time 1 hour Components V, S, M (burning incense), F (a set of prayer beads or other prayer device worth at least 500 gp), DF Range touch Target living creature touched Duration instantaneous Saving Throw none; Spell Resistance yes
This spell removes the burden of misdeeds from the subject. The creature seeking atonement must be truly repentant and desirous of setting right its misdeeds. If the atoning creature committed the evil act unwittingly or under some form of compulsion, atonement operates normally at no cost to you.
However, in the case of a creature atoning for deliberate misdeeds, you must intercede with your deity (requiring you to expend 2,500 gp in rare incense and offerings).
Atonement may be cast for one of several purposes, depending on the version selected. Reverse Magical Alignment Change: If a creature has had its alignment magically changed, atonement returns its alignment to its original status at no additional cost. Restore Class: A paladin, or other class, who has lost her class features due to violating the alignment restrictions of her class may have her class features restored by this spell. Restore Cleric or Druid Spell Powers: A cleric or druid who has lost the ability to cast spells by incurring the anger of her deity may regain that ability by seeking atonement from another cleric of the same deity or another druid. If the transgression was intentional, the casting cleric must expend 2,500 gp in rare incense and offerings for her god's intercession.
Redemption or Temptation: You may cast this spell upon a creature of an opposing alignment in order to offer it a chance to change its alignment to match yours. The prospective subject must be present for the entire casting process. Upon completion of the spell, the subject freely chooses whether it retains its original alignment or acquiesces to your offer and changes to your alignment. No duress, compulsion, or magical influence can force the subject to take advantage of the opportunity offered if it is unwilling to abandon its old alignment. This use of the spell does not work on outsiders or any creature incapable of changing its alignment naturally.
Though the spell description refers to evil acts, atonement can be used on any creature that has performed acts against its alignment, regardless of the actual alignment in question.
Note: Normally, changing alignment is up to the player. This use of atonement offers a method for a character to change his or her alignment drastically, suddenly, and definitively.
|
By becoming lawful you lost the ability to rage. I didn't see anywhere something along the lines of atonement that gives you rage back. Let me know where this is written. Until then you have issues at my table trying to rage.Restore Class: A paladin, or other class, who has lost her class features due to violating the alignment restrictions of her class may have her class features restored by this spell.
I am thinking through the conversation between a barbarian and the non-lawful priest casting the spell wherein the barbarian has to explain that he wants to atone for his previous lawful behavior while a monk and i think it may have the potential to be the most hilarious RP encounter in the history of the game.
BARBARIAN AM BARBARIAN PROMISE TO NEVER FOLLOW SILLY LAWFUL RULES AGAIN!!!
|
|
Ah, I understand. However, DMs ruling against atonement working does not mean atonement cannot work. Rendering Andrew's statement completely false. Barbarian's can atone and restore their rage powers.
The only part of my statement it renders false, is the fact that there is somewhere that ambiguously states a Barbarian could get their rage back, albeit for a cost of gold and/or prestige.
But as a GM, I have the right to deny the atonement as well.
I’d like be ok with one shift, but the 2nd, not so much.
|
|
Let's cite Atonement again, with the boldfacing on a different passage:
However, in the case of a creature atoning for deliberate misdeeds, you must intercede with your deity (requiring you to expend 2,500 gp in rare incense and offerings)
OK; to whom is a barbarian atoning?
Barbarians (or, for that matter, monks seeking to level again) do not receive their abilities from temperamental deities, and thus should be exempt from the 2500gp requirement. (Paladins and clerics, as tanks-who-swift-heal and casters-who-know-all-spells respectively, are two of the most powerful classes in the game; it stands to reason, from a game-balance perspective, that their sources of power are more fickle.)
|
|
Just one more points:
You have in the write-up for Paladin, Druid and Anti-Paladin an explicit mentioning that Attonement works to allow you gaining levels in this class again. This sentence is missing in the Barbarian errata and also no mentioning in the Ex-Monk write-up if he ever can gain new Monk levels after becoming non-lawful.
In the end - this is a grey area. I won't convince you of my view and all I can advice is not to try out a monk-barbarian cross class in PFS games. You are asking for trouble.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If you as a GM do not feel the character is truly repentant, atonement doesn't work.
It is not the GM's privilege or responsibility to dictate the roleplaying of a PC.
It is the player's job to play his character. The player decides whether his PC is truly repentant, not the GM or anybody else.
-Matt
|
|
Given that various weirdo combinations of alchemist, synthecist and dragon-disciple to yield strengths of 40-50+ are often discussed in the various DPR-maximization threads, I'd assert that the cheese specter does not loom particularly large in the case of barbarians who forfeit gaining a point of BAB to spend a level going to the dojo. Heck, he can't even Flurry with a falcata.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
If you as a GM do not feel the character is truly repentant, atonement doesn't work.It is not the GM's privilege or responsibility to dictate the roleplaying of a PC.
It is the player's job to play his character. The player decides whether his PC is truly repentant, not the GM or anybody else.
-Matt
That isn't strictly true. Ultimately the God's and/or NPC's have to determine whether they feel the PC is repentant. The GM has to roleplay the deities and the NPC's.
Also, it is a GM's job to adjudicate situations such as this.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If you as a GM do not feel the character is truly repentant, atonement doesn't work.It is not the GM's privilege or responsibility to dictate the roleplaying of a PC.
It is the player's job to play his character. The player decides whether his PC is truly repentant, not the GM or anybody else.
-Matt
First I agreed with William, then I agreed with Matt. Now I'm just confused. :P
|
|
Cheezers gonna cheeze, yo.
A barbarian who becmes lawful loses the ability to rage and cannot gain more levels as a barbarian. She retains all other benefits of the class.
It says nothing about *staying* lawful or returning to a chaotic alignment. It's when they *become* lawful that they lose access to rage and further Barbarian levels. There is no method provided to restore access to Rage or the Barbarian class.
You become lawful, at any time, for any reason, and it's goodbye rage, rage powers, and further advancement in the Barbarian class.
At least, that's my read of it, and how I'll adjudicate it at any table I run, as well as advising my GMs of the same should they inquire.
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
Hey there, TOZ.
When you ask, "Are you stating that atonement does not work, or that you too would rule against it working?" what I hear you asking is: "Are you saying that atonement does work that way at your table, or are you saying that atonement shouldn't work that way at anybody's table?"
And my own answer to that seems obvious to me: I don't think atonement will work that way at my table in PFS OP, because I can't adjudicate it the way I would want to, in order to make sure that the alignment-shucking-and-jiving PC pays an appropriate penalty. If a simple expenditure of gold were sufficient to restore a barbarian's rage powers, that rule about Ex-Barbarians would have been written differently.
Even if I thought that atonement would be sufficient, at my table, I would rule that the character would have to have atoned at my table, and immediately upon falling back to her non-lawful ways. Why? Because otherwise, I'm going to presume that the player tried to get his rage back at a previous session, and that GM told him "no". And if Mommy-GM says you can't have rage-cookies before dinner, you can't come running to Daddy-GM and expect a diffeent ruling.
But, you know, if you want to run atonement differently at your table, be my guest. I'm not the boss of you.
|
|
Well obviously. I don't play PFS.
Then why are you bothering to post on a PFS message board trying to quote rules to us?
I don't get this concept. Why would you bother to come post over on these forums and argue how PFS should or should not work, if you aren't invested in how it should or should not work?
|
|
None of which answered the question Will, nor have I said anything contrary to what you just said.
Then why are you bothering to post on a PFS message board trying to quote rules to us?
I was linked to it from another thread.
I don't get this concept. Why would you bother to come post over on these forums and argue how PFS should or should not work, if you aren't invested in how it should or should not work?
If I told you a yellow stoplight means 'speed up', would you not correct me?
|
|
There is no method provided to restore access to Rage or the Barbarian class.Are you stating that Atonement does not work, or that you too would rule against it working?
Reading through it, the atonement spell works just fine, RAW. RAI, however, I think is screaming. The fact that the Paladin class description spells things out as being fixed by atonement but the Barbarian and Monk classes do not makes it pretty cleat to me that the intention was that you not be able to rage so long as you are of lawful alignment.
Doesn't matter, we play RAW in PFS for the sake of consistency. Like I said, cheezers gonna cheeze.
I will point out, however, that an atonement spell only talks about restoring class features, not taking further levels in the class. Yeah, I could argue that both ways and I think the argument for allowing you to continue to progress in the class post-atonement is stronger than barring it.
Were it solely up to me, I'd tell you "tough noogies", but that's not what the rules say.
|
|
I will point out, however, that an atonement spell only talks about restoring class features, not taking further levels in the class. Yeah, I could argue that both ways and I think the argument for allowing you to continue to progress in the class post-atonement is stronger than barring it.
Would anyone seriously maintain that barbarians are under tighter alignment restrictions than paladins?
-- Breaking the rules is kind of a hallmark of the class.
I don't really see what the problem is. My barbarian rages and flurries all the time. It's all about compromise. He's true neutral and took the Martial Artist archetype of monk. If you want to learn something in the dojo and still maintain that non-lawful rage, you simply miss out on the monk abilities that are derived from inner balance and gain the ones that are learned through martial training.
And for my vote, the only reason a Barbarian can't rage when he's lawful is that he became to orderly and disciplined to be able to fully let go and be primal. Should he stop being so disciplined (by shifting away from lawful), he shouldn't have that problem anymore. I don't see atonement being an issue since there is no religion involved.
|
|
The PFS rules explicitly say that you can use Atonement for Clerics, Druids, Inqusitors and Paladin.
Atonement 2 PP (8 PP to restore cleric/druid/inquisitor/ paladin powers)
The Barbarian isn't mentioned.
Some people here therefore might argue it's free. This is the (in my view) fallacy argument because it isnt written here therefore it has to be free. But I would say it is at least as expensive - 8 PP or 3000 gold as for a cleric, Druid, inquisitor or paladin if at all possible.
So even if possible - it would be expensive.
|
|
I think the "eye" test is what the GM will use to determine if the character is actually remorseful. Often times this can be determined by talking to the player about the character's motivations and backstory.
I have seen cases, usually in home games, where a barbarian is duped into joining a cult of monkish warriors. They brainwash him until some outside force (or epiphany) shows him the fallacy. Then he goes uber barbarian on them. This would be a case of the chaotic - lawful - chaotic path and an atonement would seem to be an effective restoration solution.
However, I have also spoken to players who, clearing, were just farming for flurry of blows, or the speed boost, or the saving throw bonus. In those case, IMO, the character would not actually be remorseful and would not be granted atonement. YMMV.
|
|
(Reprise...)
> If you as a GM do not feel the character is truly repentant, atonement doesn't work.It is not the GM's privilege or responsibility to dictate the roleplaying of a PC.
It is the player's job to play his character. The player decides whether his PC is truly repentant, not the GM or anybody else.
-Matt
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
I think the "eye" test is what the GM will use to determine if the character is actually remorseful. Often times this can be determined by talking to the player about the character's motivations and backstory.
I have seen cases, usually in home games, where a barbarian is duped into joining a cult of monkish warriors. They brainwash him until some outside force (or epiphany) shows him the fallacy. Then he goes uber barbarian on them. This would be a case of the chaotic - lawful - chaotic path and an atonement would seem to be an effective restoration solution.
However, I have also spoken to players who, clearing, were just farming for flurry of blows, or the speed boost, or the saving throw bonus. In those case, IMO, the character would not actually be remorseful and would not be granted atonement. YMMV.
This is a really rough spot to be in as a GM. I also don't see it being very effective since most people who want to cheese things up are just going to shop around for a GM who is more lenient.
I suspect if a character came to me with a suggestion like that I would do my best to discourage it and tell them to have someone else sign off on it.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
Nature of the beast, I suppose, but I really don't like to see more of the GM's "better judgement" be stripped away by layers of rules to protect the 99% of players doing it "right" from the 1% who are doing it "wrong."
I'm pretty much on the same page as you. I just get frustrated because there are so many cheese free ways to make great, fun characters and people ignore that in favor of junk to eck out an extra 1 point of DPR.