|
Can't check the legal for play in Pathfinder Society atm, but does it allow Paladin alternate base classes from the APG? I ask because of the following:
Sacred Servant
Direct quote: 'Paladins, as a general rule, venerate the gods of good and purity, but some take this a step further, dedicating themselves to a specific deity and furthering the cause of the faith. [..blah blah devotion = powers..] A sacred servant must select one deity to worship. This deity's alignment must be lawful good, lawful neutral, or neutral good.'
That implicitly states that base paladins don't have to worship a specific deity in order to have paladin powers, and thus don't normally follow the 'one step' rule, since the 'one step' thing is specifically noted in this alternate class's write-up as something the Sacred Servant does have to adhere to. (though, of course, not all paladins who follow a specific god have to be Sacred Servants, but paladins who don't follow a specific god can never be Sacred Servants.)
So I think there's room there for a paladin who is a devotee of Cayden Cailean or whatever in the sense of attending their services and observing their rituals, but who isn't a Sacred Servant of Cayden, doesn't derive his powers from Cayden, and doesn't necessarily work on behalf of his church. (All assuming the services and rituals of Cayden don't transgress his code, of course, which is the major sticking point of Asmodeus.)
And all assuming this is legal for PFS.
|
|
Can't check the legal for play in Pathfinder Society atm, but does it allow Paladin alternate base classes from the APG? I ask because of the following:
Sacred Servant
Direct quote: 'Paladins, as a general rule, venerate the gods of good and purity, but some take this a step further, dedicating themselves to a specific deity and furthering the cause of the faith. [..blah blah devotion = powers..] A sacred servant must select one deity to worship. This deity's alignment must be lawful good, lawful neutral, or neutral good.'
That implicitly states that base paladins don't have to worship a specific deity in order to have paladin powers, and thus don't normally follow the 'one step' rule, since the 'one step' thing is specifically noted in this alternate class's write-up as something the Sacred Servant does have to adhere to. (though, of course, not all paladins who follow a specific god have to be Sacred Servants, but paladins who don't follow a specific god can never be Sacred Servants.)
So I think there's room there for a paladin who is a devotee of Cayden Cailean or whatever in the sense of attending their services and observing their rituals, but who isn't a Sacred Servant of Cayden, doesn't derive his powers from Cayden, and doesn't necessarily work on behalf of his church. (All assuming the services and rituals of Cayden don't transgress his code, of course, which is the major sticking point of Asmodeus.)
And all assuming this is legal for PFS.
Except that it's not. We've already have had a ruling from Josh and Jason on this. It's one step folks. No matter what is said in the APG.
|
|
I categorically refuse to acknowledge the concept of Bubble Boy Paladin. Being a Paladin requires a concious, deliberate, and aware dediation to the cause. While some mutant might be born a sorcerer, Paladins are MADE.
Unless you have a Bubble-Boy Paladin who does not get out much and is ignorant to his deity being evil?
+1
|
Except that it's not. We've already have had a ruling from Josh and Jason on this. It's one step folks. No matter what is said in the APG.Can't check the legal for play in Pathfinder Society atm, but does it allow Paladin alternate base classes from the APG? I ask because of the following:
Sacred Servant
Direct quote: 'Paladins, as a general rule, venerate the gods of good and purity, but some take this a step further, dedicating themselves to a specific deity and furthering the cause of the faith. [..blah blah devotion = powers..] A sacred servant must select one deity to worship. This deity's alignment must be lawful good, lawful neutral, or neutral good.'
That implicitly states that base paladins don't have to worship a specific deity in order to have paladin powers, and thus don't normally follow the 'one step' rule, since the 'one step' thing is specifically noted in this alternate class's write-up as something the Sacred Servant does have to adhere to. (though, of course, not all paladins who follow a specific god have to be Sacred Servants, but paladins who don't follow a specific god can never be Sacred Servants.)
So I think there's room there for a paladin who is a devotee of Cayden Cailean or whatever in the sense of attending their services and observing their rituals, but who isn't a Sacred Servant of Cayden, doesn't derive his powers from Cayden, and doesn't necessarily work on behalf of his church. (All assuming the services and rituals of Cayden don't transgress his code, of course, which is the major sticking point of Asmodeus.)
And all assuming this is legal for PFS.
I've never seen a bit about Jason for this. As for Josh and the Guide, as someone pointed out earlier in the thread, Josh is planning to amend the 'one step' rule in the Guide so it only applies to classes like the Cleric.
As far as I know, there is no hard 'ruling' concerning Paladins worshipping other gods. It isn't in the core book. It IS still in the Guide, which is reason enough to enforce it, but it looks like that will change. Once it does, there will really be nothing that says a Paladin has to worship a specific god. They will have the same restrictions that a Fighter or a Sorcerer do.
Ultimately, so long as the Paladin can roleplay Lawful and Good, he can worship whoever he wants. It's up to the GM to decide if the Paladin is breaking his code or not during the game.
|
Here's some food for thought:
"The Pathfinder Chronicles campaign setting has
a rich assortment of deities to choose from that should
nearly always match the sort of cleric you’re trying to
play — dealing in abstract clerics is not something we
want to see in an environment that’s supporting Paizo’s
campaign setting" [emphasis mine]
This is in the Guide to Organized Play, re: clerics selecting a deity. If we don't want to see the "abstract" worship from clerics or Order of the Star cavaliers (which, let's face it, are really just non-LG paladins), then why is it acceptable for paladins to worship this abstract of LAW and GOOD???
First, warning, wall of text approaching. lol
Alright, this discussion would work just as well in the regular Pathfinder RPG forums, like all the other paladin threads, but I am continuing it here because it has relevance to PFS play as well.
I went and did some research through various books and here is what I have come up with. 1st and 2nd edition D&D do not mention a paladin worshiping, or more properly dedicating to, a specific deity. The 3rd edition player's handbook says this:
Paladins need not devote themselves to a single deity—devotion to righteousness is enough.
This line was for some reason left out of the Pathfinder update to the 3.5 rules. However, the only place in the Pathfinder core book where following a specific deity is mentioned at all is in the divine bond section, where it says this:
Upon reaching 5th level, a paladin forms a divine bond with her god.
So does this somewhat buried line mean that all paladins are required to follow a specific deity in Pathfinder once they hit level 5, or is it only those who wish to use the divine bond power that must pick a deity?
Then, we have the new variant paladin, the Sacred Servant as mentioned in an earlier post, which specifically says this:
Paladins as a general rule, venerate the gods of good and purity, but some take this a step further, dedicating themselves to a specific deity and furthering the cause of the faith.
This makes it sound that, with the release of the APG, paladins are not required to follow a specific deity unless they either choose to or want to be a Sacred Servant.
And finally, the line from the PFS Guide:
You may choose to worship an evil god, but keep in mind that your alignment has to be within one step of your god’s alignment.
This line applies to everyone because, generally, everyone's characters worship a god or gods, regardless of their class. This line is not just for divine classes, that is why there is the clarification right after about clerics. For example, if you want your fighter to worship Asmodeus, then your character's alignment has to be within one step of LE. And worshiping is totally different than, say, stopping at a shrine to a deity of luck or travel and making an offering, you know, just in case.
And since this is PFS and it uses Golarion, both the Gazetteer and Campaign Setting books says that while not common, there are paladins that do not follow a specific deity, meaning that paladins who choose to not serve a specific deity should be perfectly legal.
|
It appears as though we have three rules sources to consider.
1) Core Rulebook. This defines the paladin's code of conduct. While the code of conduct precludes the Paladin from working with evil characters, a strict reading of the code does not preclude the paladin from serving an evil deity. This is a strict reading of the rule. I've seen a lot of inferring about what a Paladin can/should know and do, but from a rules perspective, a Paladin in the Service of an evil deity is not precluded.
2) Guide to Organized Play. This defines what is allowed within the confines of Pathfinder Society play. This document currently states that a character must be within one step of their deity. This seems straightforward, but it brings us to...
3) Rulings by Joshua Frost. Mr. Frost (I'm sorry, but I'm not certain if Joshua or Josh is appropriate, so I'll go with the more formal reference) has stated on the boards that that wording was meant to apply to classes that had such a restriction and that it would be corrected in a future version of the Guide. (It was not corrected in the current 3.0, but it appears that 3.0 really only updated what comprises legal player resources, and perhaps should really been a 2.x version given the minimal changes - but this was Mr. Frost's/Paizo's call and not mine.) So, if we accept that on-board rulings are the controlling authority, a Paladin of Asmodeus would be a legal player choice. If we reject Mr. Frosts authority to make on-site rulings, then I'm not sure where we are left.
So that's the RAW/Strict Reading interpretation that I have.
As a role-player, and one who has been playing the Cheliax faction, I can honestly see where there is room for a Paladin of Asmodeus.
Reasoning.
A) A Lawful-Good character who resides within Cheliax might see the service of Asmodeus as necessary in order to work within the law for change.
B) Asmodeus might see it as useful to have a LG Paladin available to
1) Keep Order
2) Mollify the masses
3) Serve some deeper plan.
C) Given the Prince of Deceit's reputation, I thoroughly see it within the realm of possibility that he could convince an LG character that there was a role for good within the nation and within his service.
"I want the evil souls to serve me in hell, but the uncorruptible souls need to be kept in line. If you serve me, I'll allow you to minister to their needs with relatively little interference. You will have authority to protect the little people from those above as long as they stay in line, do their jobs, pay their taxes. I need law and order, and a Paladin serves the law. In this instance our goals are aligned." (Asmodeus could either be sincere, or it could all be some part of a larger plan to achieve a greater evil, but in either instance, might sway a Paladin who wanted to be a champion of good and law. I'm minded of the quote "The greatest trick the devil ever performed was convincing people that he did not exist." To preclude the power of Asmodeus to fool a mortal into believing he was serving law and good while also serving Asmodeus would be to deny his status as a greater deity. Call it a DC 200 bluff check versus the Paladin's Wisdom (+4)+ Sense Motive Ranks (+12 at highest legal level) + other bonuses (call it +10) + rolling a natural 20 = 56 or so tops.)
This would be a very thin line for a paladin to walk, but think of any historical figure who had to work with great evil in order to do great good. (Mother Teresa raised money from brutal dictators. Schindler worked in a death camp, but worked to save those he was charged with killing. Paul McCartney counseled Julian Lennon to accept Yoko Ono.)
I'm actually intrigued enough to try to put together a character for the next all-low table.
Just remember that the key words are worship and serve. Those are not casual things and require devotion to a deity. A paladin could work for Asmodeus, (trying to change things from within, to fight a greater CE enemy, or because he was deceived about who he is working for) but he could not worship, or pray to, or truly serve him and stay Good-aligned.
|
|
The OP's question (concerning PFS) seems to be answered in the negative, but on the general question of the possibility, I think it's likely there are (could be) Paladins who worship Asmodeus. I don't however think there are many (any) Paladins in the Church of Asmodeus.
None of that means I'd ever allow it in *my* game of course.
|
|
Just remember that the key words are worship and serve. Those are not casual things and require devotion to a deity. A paladin could work for Asmodeus, (trying to change things from within, to fight a greater CE enemy, or because he was deceived about who he is working for) but he could not worship, or pray to, or truly serve him and stay Good-aligned.
Again, this is an inference of the rules, but is not actually supported by rules text. I'm not saying I disagree with you, but this is really an interpretation, not supported by the actual text in the Core Rules.
|
|
The OP's question (concerning PFS) seems to be answered in the negative, but on the general question of the possibility, I think it's likely there are (could be) Paladins who worship Asmodeus. I don't however think there are many (any) Paladins in the Church of Asmodeus.
None of that means I'd ever allow it in *my* game of course.
But we aren't talking about *your* game, we're talking about Paizo's Game.
|
|
I've never seen a bit about Jason for this. As for Josh and the Guide, as someone pointed out earlier in the thread, Josh is planning to amend the 'one step' rule in the Guide so it only applies to classes like the Cleric.
As far as I know, there is no hard 'ruling' concerning Paladins worshipping other gods. It isn't in the core book. It IS still...
Here is the quote:
"There's no rule for this because there shouldn't NEED to be a rule.
Paladins MUST be lawful good.
In order to worship a deity, you need to follow that deity's teachings and philosophies and do things that would make that deity proud.
If you don't worship a lawful good deity, you are increasingly doing things to impress your deity that are at odds with being a paladin.
Once an axis of your alignment drifts more than one step away (law to chaos or good to evil), maintaining a paladin's code and following a deity's philosophy and teachings become pretty much impossible to maintain for long. And without long-term maintenance, that faith simply cannot hold the order together.
To be devout, you need to adhere closely to your deity's alignment. To be a paladin, you need to be lawful good. That pretty much sums it up, as far as I can tell.
On Golarion, the following deities in particular are established in game canon as having paladin orders: Erastil, Iomedae, Torage, Sarenrae, Abadar. I suspect that both Shelyn and Irori have a few paladins worshiping them as well, but they don't have as many as the other five. There are no paladins serving any of the other deities."
|
|
I've never seen a bit about Jason for this. As for Josh and the Guide, as someone pointed out earlier in the thread, Josh is planning to amend the 'one step' rule in the Guide so it only applies to classes like the Cleric.
As far as I know, there is no hard 'ruling' concerning Paladins worshipping other gods. It isn't in the core book. It IS still...
Here is the quote:
"There's no rule for this because there shouldn't NEED to be a rule.Paladins MUST be lawful good.
In order to worship a deity, you need to follow that deity's teachings and philosophies and do things that would make that deity proud.
If you don't worship a lawful good deity, you are increasingly doing things to impress your deity that are at odds with being a paladin.
Once an axis of your alignment drifts more than one step away (law to chaos or good to evil), maintaining a paladin's code and following a deity's philosophy and teachings become pretty much impossible to maintain for long. And without long-term maintenance, that faith simply cannot hold the order together.
To be devout, you need to adhere closely to your deity's alignment. To be a paladin, you need to be lawful good. That pretty much sums it up, as far as I can tell.
On Golarion, the following deities in particular are established in game canon as having paladin orders: Erastil, Iomedae, Torage, Sarenrae, Abadar. I suspect that both Shelyn and Irori have a few paladins worshiping them as well, but they don't have as many as the other five. There are no paladins serving any of the other deities."
That was James, not Jason. I remember that post and a number of others, I was just confused when you said Jason had commented on the issue.
Do not be surprised if a GM does not allow it at a table. I would count PF 29 as an error and as it is not listed as allowed anyhow I would not allow your non LG paladin in play. To me by the core and setting rules worshiping an evil god auto brakes your code.
Just keep this in mind others will see it that same way and are within rights to make you fall if you hold to that claim.
|
|
Here is the rub. I don't like the idea of a paladin of Asmodeus. I don't think that a paladin could be that dense as to worship Asmodeus and still uphold his code.
But rules as written, its not prohibited. Even if the article in question isn't expressly cited as a PFS resource, the problem is that a paladin worshiping Asmodeus isn't prohibited and there is some support for it in the setting material, even if the guy that normally directs how the setting is suppose to work doesn't like that article.
So, until there is actually something in some PFS writing that says you can't have a paladin of Asmodeus, there is no way I would not let someone use a character that they have brought to the table at a PFS game if there is nothing else wrong with that character.
Organized play is a different beast than running your own home campaign, and you've got to be flexible enough to realize this isn't like your regular group of buddies that can sit down and e-mail each other back and forth to build their concepts and the party with their GM.
I disagree, his worship brakes the code as written in the core rules. So yes by the rule I could and would disallow it.
|
|
This line was for some reason left out of the Pathfinder update to the 3.5 rules. However, the only place in the Pathfinder core book where following a specific deity is mentioned at all is in the divine bond section, where it says this:
Another thing that was left out of the paladin description were the line in the 3.5 paladin that more or less says that a paladin doesn't choose to be a paladin, the forces of good and law choose the paladin.
In other words, in 3.5, your paladin may not have picked a specific deity, but he was picked by a deity, or deities, of law and good to serve as a champion. Very Joan of Arc . . . hearing voices, seeing visions, choosing to accept your destiny.
This allows a paladin to serve multiple deities (hey, Abadar, Sarenrae, and Iomedae may all think that X would make a great paladin, so their power really doesn't just come from one of them), but it doesn't mean that the paladin gains power from their own inner ultra Lawful Goodness, thus freeing them to worship anything they want to.
However, this isn't how its written up in Pathfinder, so it remains my own personal interpretation based on the direction the 3.5 write up seemed to be angling towards.
|
|
I disagree, his worship brakes the code as written in the core rules. So yes by the rule I could and would disallow it.
Two points on that, though.
One . . . its a very sticky wicket to extrapolate how the character "must" logically played outside of the session. The character could be a paragon of Lawful Good all through the session, but you're dinking them based on what you assume they must have to do or believe outside of the game session.
Two . . . the character, even if they break their code, isn't illegal, they just wouldn't have their paladin abilities. If you really want to play it that way, the paladin could get an atonement, play as a paladin without a god for your session (knowing in their own mind that they worship Asmodeus), and then go on to another table and play them as is with all of their powers.
sigh at risk of farther derailing this thread the code states you may not knowingly help evil. Worshiping a god even a uneducated northmen far from the heart of Chekiax knows is evil is helping to spread evil and there for brakes your code.
Paladins are not LN, you can not just ignore evil and work only on the lawful. By openly worshiping and doing the bidding of an evil god you have broken your code. You have knowingly and willfully help to spread the influence and presence of evil in the world
Disagree all you want by the rules you have broken your code.
Creative Director
|
Technically, it's a DEVELOPMENT error and not an editing error that the bit about paladins of Asmodeous slipped through into print. The whole "what is Lawful Good" and "what's okay to do as a paladin" scene is WAY too complicated as it stands without us confusing things more by saying a paladin can serve a lawful evil deity. It should have been changed before it saw print, but it slipped through.
Paladins of Asmodeus are, in any event, not allowed in the Pathfinder Society. They're fine in home games if the GM is cool with them. I would not be.
Eh I stand corrected on the type of error then. Thanks for the imput
|
|
I liken asmodeus to lord vetenari from discworld. He's lawful evil, but he wants his people to succeed. He will do whatever it takes to achieve that ideal, although he's sophisticated, so overt murder isn't sometthing he does often.
I'm pretty sure he wouldn't mind a paladin, since his greatest enemies are demons. He can outmanuever the good gods, but its really hard to outmanuever an endless horde.
|
|
In the organized play document it even has this passage:
"Character Class versus Faction
Some classes are harder to play in some factions than others. In the list of factions that starts on page 10, we’ve endeavored to advise you before you make your faction choice as to what classes are suited more specifically to a faction and what classes might be quite difficult to play in a faction. These are by no means hard rules—if you have a great idea for a Paladin of the Cheliax faction, by all means play that character. Just know that you might have a harder time than most achieving the faction’s missions."If that does not say "play a paladin of Asmodeus" I am not sure what it says.
Maybe it says if you want a challenge try to play a paladin of Iomedae or Abadar, who are both worshiped in Cheliax?
This is not toward James, but the people that interjected before him.
It was also a shame to see so many people spout typo, and then condemn the idea as wrong or state the source book is a misprint assuming it was one sentence. Why not purchase the book, borrow it from a friend or go to a store that sells it, read the entry before telling us what you would allow, as what you would allow has no bearing on anything.
Read it , do not agree with it as it brakes the code. To me It seems to allow LE paladins that could NEVER fall, why would a LE god who grants you power care if ya broke some silly LG code after all you still serve him faithfully. So no I would not allow
|
|
While I disagreed with him without an official ruling, seeker was just giving his opinion, and I didn't think he was being particularly rude or anything, just supporting his argument. I think your response was a bit harsh.
Also, not having to choose a deity does not equal not getting spells from the gods. Oracles get their spells from the gods, but don't have to pick one god to worship. The spells are called "divine" for a reason. Not having to pick a deity does not mean that a deity is not involved in the process.
Using that logic, even if a paladin were to worship Asmodeus, it doesn't follow that his powers come from either his faith in Asmodeus (i.e. from his own faith) or from Asmodeus himself.
I'm leaving off on this now, because we have an official answer and this is veering into territory that goes beyond PFS play and into core game philosophy in general.
By strict pathfinder RAW yeah they have a god or no divine bond, your call. The wording is clear the paladins god grants that power and the 20th level on as well
2nd Cheilax is not the same as your own personal god you have faith in that you know for a freaking fact is EVIL. He is King of hell and lord of all devils, he traffics in souls he had corrupted in his name, his clergy sacrifice people to devils and your ok with this? Your fine with helping spread a faith that spreads evil and corruption in the world? Fine knowing the people you help and join the faith because of you are now damned to hell?
If you are then your no paladin, if you are not then your not his faithful worshiper. That simple
{Edit: And yes KEJ is right, the thing is official this thread is done.}
Ah but the PFCS is 3.5 and older then the PF rules and does not say you still gain those god granted powers, I do agree by current setting rules it is allowed, by strict PF rules it is not if ya want those 2 powers.
For now the PFCS allows it which overrides the PF rules. Now if it is still allowed come the new PFCS eh who knows, we do know they are nailing the lid on godless clerics in there so the paladin wording may or may not change
I was just making a point that by strict RAW you do not gain those without a god.
And yes Paladins that serve no one god are legal in PFS as they are as of now legal in Golarion.
|
|
Ah but the PFCS is 3.5 and older then the PF rules and does not say you still gain those god granted powers, I do agree by current setting rules it is allowed, by strict PF rules it is not if ya want those 2 powers.
For now the PFCS allows it which overrides the PF rules. Now if it is still allowed come the new PFCS eh who knows, we do know they are nailing the lid on godless clerics in there so the paladin wording may or may not change
I was just making a point that by strict RAW you do not gain those without a god.
And yes Paladins that serve no one god are legal in PFS as they are as of now legal in Golarion.
Asmodeus is a god. But ya know, ya could just houserule it. Ya know.
|
|
An idea that's intriguing to me is a paladin that worships Aroden. As have been stated, paladins don't have to derive their power from a specific deity, but can be empowered collectively by the 'gods of good and purity'. Aroden's alignment is (was) lawful neutral, so you're obeying the 'one step' rule. Of course, Aroden *is* definitely dead, and you are *not* drawing your powers from him. (though the character might believe otherwise, of course, wrong though they are.)
In fact, since aging bonuses and penalties don't apply in PFS Organised Play, you could even make the paladin an elf who was a paladin of Aroden back before Aroden died, and has been keeping the faith ever since..
What are people's opinions on such a character?
It would be pure fluff and other characters would probably consider you delusional, but since I do not think it violates any of the mechanics of the rules or PFS, it should be alright. You just have to make sure in your character's history that he did not truly believe that his powers came directly from Aroden, like if he were a Sacred Servant paladin, or he would be just like all of Aroden's clerics and be powerless. Oh, and your divine bond power may no longer work, as well, since that requires making a bond with a deity.
|
An idea that's intriguing to me is a paladin that worships Aroden. As have been stated, paladins don't have to derive their power from a specific deity, but can be empowered collectively by the 'gods of good and purity'. Aroden's alignment is (was) lawful neutral, so you're obeying the 'one step' rule. Of course, Aroden *is* definitely dead, and you are *not* drawing your powers from him. (though the character might believe otherwise, of course, wrong though they are.)
What are people's opinions on such a character?
James said in another thread that in Golarion, when a deity dies, all of their clergy looses all access to spells, and abilities that they got from the god in question.
|
|
Do not be surprised if a GM does not allow it at a table. I would count PF 29 as an error and as it is not listed as allowed anyhow I would not allow your non LG paladin in play. To me by the core and setting rules worshiping an evil god auto brakes your code.
Just keep this in mind others will see it that same way and are within rights to make you fall if you hold to that claim.
If I remember (and can copy/paste) correctly, isn't the very first rule of the Pathfinder Society:
"Our number one rule in Pathfinder Society Organized Play is to get as many people playing as often as possible. If the rules are preventing you from getting a legal table assembled for play, then the rules need to change. You, as the GM or coordinator, have the ability to stretch the rules in small ways (most of which are stated in this document) in order to ensure that as many players as possible can play. Never turn away players! If you feel the rules are forcing you to turn someone away, ask on the Pathfinder Society messageboards or email pathfindersociety@paizo.com for guidance on how to handle your specific situation. Turning away players only serves to build walls between the Society and new players—avoid doing so whenever possible!"
It doesn't say to "stretch the rules in order to ensure that someone can't play the character they want to play". It doesn't say to nitpick the fluff on someone's character sheet if they are coming at a character concept from a direction you, personally, don't like.
Would you would really mess with a player's character or turn them away in an organized play setting for something that is, at worst, an arguable gray area of the rules?
Who really cares if someone has "Asmodeus" written on their character sheet and a background full of fluff that they are happy with but that probably isn't going impact the game in any meaningful way? As long as everyone is having a good time and no one is being disruptive then isn't that the whole point of our hobby in the first place?
|
|
Do not be surprised if a GM does not allow it at a table. I would count PF 29 as an error and as it is not listed as allowed anyhow I would not allow your non LG paladin in play. To me by the core and setting rules worshiping an evil god auto brakes your code.
Just keep this in mind others will see it that same way and are within rights to make you fall if you hold to that claim.
If I remember (and can copy/paste) correctly, isn't the very first rule of the Pathfinder Society:
"Our number one rule in Pathfinder Society Organized Play is to get as many people playing as often as possible. If the rules are preventing you from getting a legal table assembled for play, then the rules need to change. You, as the GM or coordinator, have the ability to stretch the rules in small ways (most of which are stated in this document) in order to ensure that as many players as possible can play. Never turn away players! If you feel the rules are forcing you to turn someone away, ask on the Pathfinder Society messageboards or email pathfindersociety@paizo.com for guidance on how to handle your specific situation. Turning away players only serves to build walls between the Society and new players—avoid doing so whenever possible!"It doesn't say to "stretch the rules in order to ensure that someone can't play the character they want to play". It doesn't say to nitpick the fluff on someone's character sheet if they are coming at a character concept from a direction you, personally, don't like.
Would you would really mess with a player's character or turn them away in an organized play setting for something that is, at worst, an arguable gray area of the rules?
Who really cares if someone has "Asmodeus" written on their character sheet and a background full of fluff that they are happy with but that probably isn't going impact the game in any meaningful way? As long as everyone is having a good time...
Paizo cares, I care, and so do plety of other GMs. This is not just a matter of fluff. Paizo has already gone out and said this Asmodian Palidan issue was an editorial mistake. Until The Guide to PFS is changed to allow it, I will not allow it at tables that I run.
If I see this at a Con or event that I'm running tables I will report this back to HQ. I suggest other GMs to do the same.
|
|
Until The Guide to PFS is changed to allow it, I will not allow it at tables that I run.
The only part of the PFS guide that would prohibit it is a single line in the Background section that mentions your alignment has to be within one step of the god you worship. Elsewhere the guide specifies that only clerics and certain cavaliers have that restriction, and Josh has said on the message boards (quoted earlier in this thread) that first line was a mistake.
Since paladins don't have to worship ANY god, I don't see anything in the Guide or core rulebook that prohibits a player from writing "none" on the deity line and then filling their background with fluff about whatever god they wanted. As long as they are being an adult about it, are reasonably satisfying the loosely written terms of the class (the alignment restriction and code), are not being disruptive to play, and everyone at the table is having fun then I don't see any harm (or violation of the rules) in it.
Heck, you can buy slaves as fluff for your character.
Personally, I love running a table of well thought out, interesting characters in the hands of players having a great time. It is one thing (a very understandable thing) to limit game mechanics like feats and spells to ensure everyone is playing on an even field. It's another thing entirely to start putting limits on fluff, particularly when the fluff in question can be made to fit with the established fluff of the setting.
In other news, I have probably now said the word "fluff" more in one post than I have in my whole life up until this point.
|
|
Until The Guide to PFS is changed to allow it, I will not allow it at tables that I run.The only part of the PFS guide that would prohibit it is a single line in the Background section that mentions your alignment has to be within one step of the god you worship. Elsewhere the guide specifies that only clerics and certain cavaliers have that restriction, and Josh has said on the message boards (quoted earlier in this thread) that first line was a mistake.
Since paladins don't have to worship ANY god, I don't see anything in the Guide or core rulebook that prohibits a player from writing "none" on the deity line and then filling their background with fluff about whatever god they wanted. As long as they are being an adult about it, are reasonably satisfying the loosely written terms of the class (the alignment restriction and code), are not being disruptive to play, and everyone at the table is having fun then I don't see any harm (or violation of the rules) in it.
Heck, you can buy slaves as fluff for your character.
Personally, I love running a table of well thought out, interesting characters in the hands of players having a great time. It is one thing (a very understandable thing) to limit game mechanics like feats and spells to ensure everyone is playing on an even field. It's another thing entirely to start putting limits on fluff, particularly when the fluff in question can be made to fit with the established fluff of the setting.
In other news, I have probably now said the word "fluff" more in one post than I have in my whole life up until this point.
Go back and read the thread. Paizo has spoken in this on this subject.
You can call it "fluff" all you want. This is not a "fluff" issue.
|
|
Go back and read the thread. Paizo has spoken in this on this subject.
You can call it "fluff" all you want. This is not a "fluff" issue.
Well, something written on your character sheet in the "background" field that doesn't mechanically affect gameplay but helps you develop your character beyond a collection of numbers and special abilities is pretty much the definition of "fluff".
I've read the whole thread and James has spoken on the subject, but isn't Josh the one in charge of Pathfinder Society? No offense intended to James, of course. Josh will probably agree with him. It is just that I was under the impression that Josh was the "final word" so to speak regarding what is and isn't allowed in Organized Play.
Plus I still don't see the harm in it. Heck, I could play a slave-owning paladin from Katapesh. You can get a lot of mileage from a little bit of fluff.
|
|
Go back and read the thread. Paizo has spoken in this on this subject.
You can call it "fluff" all you want. This is not a "fluff" issue.
Well, something written on your character sheet in the "background" field that doesn't mechanically affect gameplay but helps you develop your character beyond a collection of numbers and special abilities is pretty much the definition of "fluff".
I've read the whole thread and James has spoken on the subject, but isn't Josh the one in charge of Pathfinder Society? No offense intended to James, of course. Josh will probably agree with him. It is just that I was under the impression that Josh was the "final word" so to speak regarding what is and isn't allowed in Organized Play.
Plus I still don't see the harm in it. Heck, I could play a slave-owning paladin from Katapesh. You can get a lot of mileage from a little bit of fluff.
And your relating one thing that doesn't have to do with the other. You can have as many slave owning paladins from Cheliax or Katapesh that you want. That's covered.
Well, just remember that what is one person's fluff is another person's alignment violations. You can get away with a lot more when you are playing with multiple GMs when you use character at conventions and other organized events because those GMs are not required to communicate with each other about a character's activities, unless it is serious enough that it gets noted on the chronicle sheet. But if you are playing with the same GM regularly, you better be prepared to explain why and how these acts that are against your alignment are not causing it to shift, especially for classes where the alignment matters. A slave-owning paladin who still owns the same slaves a few scenarios later is going to face an alignment issue in my games, whereas a paladin doing the "buy slaves to give them their freedom when it is safe" routine would not.