Do you need to carry 50 doses of devil blood seperately, or does the wand splurt some on you when it's activated?I imagine the wand is syringe shaped. Or perhaps an Epi-Pen.
Keep it clean, folks.
|
So my Chelaxian mercenary just hit 2 PA, and I was wondering about the feasibility of using a wand of Infernal Healing in place of the standard wand of Cure Light Wounds. The character is a barbarian with no means of using his own wands.
Infernal Healing advantages:
* Sorcerers, Wizards, Magus and Summoners can use with with no UMD check.
* Guaranteed 10 healing.Disadvantages:
* Paladins, Rangers and Alchemists cannot use.
* Takes 1 minute for full effect.It also has the [evil] tag and causes you to detect as evil for 1 minute, but my CN Chelaxian character simply doesn't care.
So, would a wand of Infernal Healing be a workable, perhaps even superior option for out-of-combat healing for a character who doesn't care too much about the morality of the spell?
The only thing that comes to mind is that Clerics that are good aligned or worship a deity that is good aligned cannot cast spells of an alignment opposed to theirs, such as evil. So the Evil tag makes it impossible for them to use. As for the devil blood component, there isn't a Gold piece amount listed under the spell so the cost of the wand is normal for a 1st level wand and is made with the component as already apart of it.
I wonder if they'll be removing the alignment restriction on spells for clerics, inquisitors, etc because they could use the alignment restricted spells for a alignment-furthering goal.
|
|
I wonder if they'll be removing the alignment restriction on spells for clerics, inquisitors, etc because they could use the alignment restricted spells for a alignment-furthering goal.
I would imagine never, just as Pharasma will probably never approve of raising dead by her clerics (even in order to further her goals). The question of what your GOD approves of is separate from the question of what affects your alignment, similar to how the question of what your Paladin Code approves of is separate from what local law approves of (even if there is overlap).
I tend to think of the alignment restriction on divine spells as: You ask your lawful good god (or the "divine forces of law and good") to grant you magic power to cast an evil or chaotic spell, your god/the force says "no" and you don't get the power to funnel into that spell.Clerics, druids, experienced paladins, and experienced rangers can cast divine spells. Unlike arcane spells, divine spells draw power from a divine source. Clerics gain spell power from deities or from divine forces. The divine force of nature powers druid and ranger spells, and the divine forces of law and good power paladin spells...
Well yes, that's how I imagine it too, but surely a God will understand that it's not the spell, but how it is used, right? They of all entities should know that casting an evil spell isn't really an evil act.
Hence why I'm wondering if the alignment restrictions of clerics and inquisitors (and others) will be nixed. Guess we'll see in 4.3 :)
|
Contributor
|
I would imagine never, just as Pharasma will probably never approve of raising dead by her clerics (even in order to further her goals). The question of what your GOD approves of is separate from the question of what affects your alignment, similar to how the question of what your Paladin Code approves of is separate from what local law approves of (even if there is overlap).
James L. Sutter wrote a whole Pathfinder novel, Death's Heretic that turns on a temple of Pharasma contracting to resurrect someone. Does that contradict something that's been written about Pharasma's faith somewhere? I note that there's nothing in the "Taboos" section of her entry in Faiths of Balance about resurrection.
|
Well yes, that's how I imagine it too, but surely a God will understand that it's not the spell, but how it is used, right? They of all entities should know that casting an evil spell isn't really an evil act.
Hence why I'm wondering if the alignment restrictions of clerics and inquisitors (and others) will be nixed. Guess we'll see in 4.3 :)
I think it's more that the deities don't actually have those spells to grant, and as such, the cleric doesn't have the ability to prepare or have them on his spell list to cast from a staff/wand/scroll.
That makes sense to me. If something is antithetical to their nature, then they can't give you what they don't have.
|
|
In the case of Iomedai she is against fiends, all fiends. Infernal healing is powered by the blood of fiends. So anyone who recieves their power from Iomedai may need an atonement if they accept infernal healing. That very clearly goes against her edicts. It would be like a cleric of shelyn destroying art.
|
In the case of Iomedai she is against fiends, all fiends. Infernal healing is powered by the blood of fiends. So anyone who recieves their power from Iomedai may need an atonement if they accept infernal healing. That very clearly goes against her edicts. It would be like a cleric of shelyn destroying art.
So, getting blood from fiends is against Iomedai's principles? What, her favored weapon is a mace?
Is the only way to get blood from a fiend to get it from a willing fiend? Doesn't say in the spell that it requires freely-given blood, does it.
|
|
In the case of Iomedai she is against fiends, all fiends. Infernal healing is powered by the blood of fiends. So anyone who recieves their power from Iomedai may need an atonement if they accept infernal healing. That very clearly goes against her edicts. It would be like a cleric of shelyn destroying art.So, getting blood from fiends is against Iomedai's principles? What, her favored weapon is a mace?
Is the only way to get blood from a fiend to get it from a willing fiend? Doesn't say in the spell that it requires freely-given blood, does it.
It doesn't matter--you are taking devil blood into you in order to gain the devil's power. We're talking about a deity who hates fiends so much that some of her clerics despise all tieflings, even tiefling paladins (for a high profile example of this attitude, see Arael from Council of Thieves).
In the recent thread about egregious violations of a deity's edicts, where an Iomedaen or Sarenrite cleric specifically and intentionally activating infernal healing was used as an example, Mike chimed in that an atonement would be in order.
|
|
In the case of Iomedai she is against fiends, all fiends. Infernal healing is powered by the blood of fiends. So anyone who recieves their power from Iomedai may need an atonement if they accept infernal healing. That very clearly goes against her edicts. It would be like a cleric of shelyn destroying art.So, getting blood from fiends is against Iomedai's principles? What, her favored weapon is a mace?
Is the only way to get blood from a fiend to get it from a willing fiend? Doesn't say in the spell that it requires freely-given blood, does it.
It doesn't matter--you are taking devil blood into you in order to gain the devil's power. We're talking about a deity who hates fiends so much that some of her clerics despise all tieflings, even tiefling paladins (for a high profile example of this attitude, see Arael from Council of Thieves).
In the recent thread about egregious violations of a deity's edicts, where an Iomedaen or Sarenrite cleric specifically and intentionally activating infernal healing was used as an example, Mike chimed in that an atonement would be in order.
You're reading a lot into that that isn't in the spell description. That's fine for roleplay, but that's not how the spell works and presenting a deity as requiring an atonement for that can be unusually harsh.
The magical effect is that it makes you detect as evil for its duration, and then it expires. At its worst, the deity should not like you for that single minute and then it should be over.
You do not become evil with the use of the spell.
|
|
Back to the mechanics, I've had a character have a wand of infernal healing for 2 prestige, and a wand of CLW for 2 prestige, and found that the wand of infernal healing got much, much more use - to the point where it would've only been necessary to have a couple of CLW scrolls on hand for emergencies.
Maybe not even requiring the scrolls, if your party members are willing to be generous in exchanging the use of their CLW wands for the use of your IH wand where applicable.
|
|
Avatar whether or not you become evil for the spell is irrelevant. Using it is still against the tenets of Iomedai and Serenrae. If the want is used on/by a Cleric/Paladin of either deity or a Dawnflower Dervish and the Ceric/Paladin or Dawnflower Dervish does not attempt their save, they need an atonement.
That is not my call on the issue, although I agree with it, that is what Michael Brock has said. I think he also said that Serenrae would understand if it was a life or death situation because she less intense then Iomedai.
In a party which does not use a bunch of minute per level buffs and where there is nothing preventing people from using it the wand of infernal does do superior healing.
But characters with minute per level buffs are going to be reluctant to wait in the dungeon to heal while one of the comrades heals one hp per round. Parties with deities to consider will also not want to use IH.
My bard is a perfect example of both. She is a Dawnflower Dervish who uses shield to boost her AC (she got it through a Ring of Spell Knowledge II) Because she receives class abilities from worshiping Serenrae she needs to follow the tenets of Serenrae, or at least of the Dawnflower Cultists (who also worship Serenrai). My bard would not appreciate IH being used because it forces her to have to use more castings of shield and will cause problems for her if someone forgets hat she is a devote follower of Serenrae.
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
Iomedae has a problem with people using devil's blood? It's a good thing that infernal healing doesn't require devil's blood, then.
I've oft-times recommended that people get infernal healing cast right before battle. It's slower than cure light wounds, but it automatically stabilizes a recipient who drops unconscious, and it stops Bleed effects before they begin.
|
|
In the case of Iomedai she is against fiends, all fiends. Infernal healing is powered by the blood of fiends. So anyone who recieves their power from Iomedai may need an atonement if they accept infernal healing. That very clearly goes against her edicts. It would be like a cleric of shelyn destroying art.So, getting blood from fiends is against Iomedai's principles? What, her favored weapon is a mace?
Is the only way to get blood from a fiend to get it from a willing fiend? Doesn't say in the spell that it requires freely-given blood, does it.
It doesn't matter--you are taking devil blood into you in order to gain the devil's power. We're talking about a deity who hates fiends so much that some of her clerics despise all tieflings, even tiefling paladins (for a high profile example of this attitude, see Arael from Council of Thieves).
In the recent thread about egregious violations of a deity's edicts, where an Iomedaen or Sarenrite cleric specifically and intentionally activating infernal healing was used as an example, Mike chimed in that an atonement would be in order.
You're reading a lot into that that isn't in the spell description. That's fine for roleplay, but that's not how the spell works and presenting a deity as requiring an atonement for that can be unusually harsh.
The magical effect is that it makes you detect as evil for its duration, and then it expires. At its worst, the deity should not like you for that single minute and then it should be over.
You do not become evil with the use of the spell.
You don't become evil at all. However, it's infernal healing, it comes from the power of fiends, and it requires an unholy anointment of foul substances--devil's blood or unholy water; even the wand spurts these out on the target, since it is actually in the rules text of the spell. Most good deities wouldn't have a particular issue with this, but if you're the one casting it on yourself or others and you're getting your powers from Sarenrae (perversion of the Dawnflower's portfolio of healing) or Iomedae (relying on evil outsiders), it has been ruled to require an atonement. The same as it isn't an evil act in PFS to planar bind and pay a fiend to fight for you in a scenario, but Iomedae would still require a Cleric of Iomedae/Wizard/Mystic Theurge to atone for such an action.
|
|
I believe a Tiefling can be descended from demons or devils. Their book is called the Blood of Fiends. Their description says they have the Blood of Fiends. I'm pretty sure a fiend is someone who comes from a nether plane. Much like I believe an Angel is someone who comes from a celestial one.
Azata are angels aren't they?
Archons are angels too right?
|
|
From the PRD
"Angels are a race of celestials, beings who live on the good-aligned outer planes. Angels can be of any good alignment. Lawful angels hail from Heaven, neutral angels from Nirvana, and chaotic angels from Elysium"
"Azatas are a race of celestials native to the plane of Elysium, where the pursuit of freedom and goodness is paramount."
Azatas are angels
I'm sure I could look in the blood of fiends and find similar things for fiends. Devil, Demons, and Daemons are all fiends.
A fiend is simple someone from the evil aligned planes
|
|
wow... sorry then. Guess it's just another example of why having played the older versions of this game of ours bites me.
I believe that azatas are not angels (angels are just a subtype of outsider that can have all three good alignments, even though the ones in the Bestiary are listed as NG). Angel implies a specific subtype of good outsider.
However, fiend is a catch-all for evil outsiders. I think the catch-all for good outsiders may be "celestial".
|
|
I on the other hand have always used fiend to be a creature of the C/E alignment from the plane of the Abyss. (to me) you needed cold iron weapons to fight fiends (and silver to fight devils). But that does not appear to be true in PF now...wow... sorry then. Guess it's just another example of why having played the older versions of this game of ours bites me.I believe that azatas are not angels (angels are just a subtype of outsider that can have all three good alignments, even though the ones in the Bestiary are listed as NG). Angel implies a specific subtype of good outsider.
However, fiend is a catch-all for evil outsiders. I think the catch-all for good outsiders may be "celestial".
I know I'm not truly old-school, but I've played since AD&D, and I'm almost positive that fiend has been a catch-all for evil outsiders since at least Planescape.
|
My Cleric of Mephistopheles (who just hit level2 .. thanks DM Credit!) uses a Wand of Infernal Healing instead of CLW. Ive only had one complaint in game .. but I think that was more because hes Cheliax... the character didnt seem to care that my character was using foul magic to heal him.....
Andoran double standards :)
|
|
Can someone cite the post from Mike (ie. provide a link to it)?
I can't fathom a character having to atone for simply having a spell cast on them.
Casting a spell, OK, but receiving a spell (even if it has a save) seems a bit overboard for the atonement requirement.
It's for casting the spell (or buying a wand of it and activating the wand) not for receiving it.
|
|
http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2p7j4?Beyond-Good-and-EvilActs-That-Betray-Your -Deity#1
The third reply is Mike's
He says
"As Andrew mentioned, if you spit in the face of the tenets of your deity and the faith, An Atonement is required."
I think it would be spitting the face of Iomedae to accept infernal healing, except maybe in the direst of circumstances due to her no evil of any kind policies.
I think Serenrae would not approve but she would let it slide in critical situations being a more compromising goddess and being the goddess of healing.
I think for Paladins it depends partially on their deity and partially on their code.
|
Contributor
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I could probably be swayed around to your point of view, Mahtobedis, at least for Iomedae (the only one of the two goddesses you mention I've done extensive reading on), in a home game.
I just don't think there's any fair way to adjudicate it in organized play.
|
Can someone cite the post from Mike (ie. provide a link to it)?
I can't fathom a character having to atone for simply having a spell cast on them.
Casting a spell, OK, but receiving a spell (even if it has a save) seems a bit overboard for the atonement requirement.
So Here is The Link that Mahtobedis posted
Which also fits Mikes other comment on the same thing here.
Casting an evil spell is not an alignment infraction in and of itself, as long as it doesn't violate any codes, tenents of faith, or other such issues.
The Basic Idea with an Tenant of faith you so are not resolved of responsibility for it just because you asked someone else to do it for you.
It is one thing to have it done against your wishes, but another if you asked it to be done for you.
I hate real world examples but I find this one too funny ;)
It is like a Catholic man telling his Priest he did not go against the Catholic tenant of not using condoms because his wife put it on him... ;)
|
|
I don't think any god will hold it against their if infernal healing is cast on their servant while their servant is unconscious. It's not like they are aware they getting healed. Even if they told the party not to, the servant can't be blamed if the party chooses to ignore them.
However willfully accepting something that violates the tenents of your faith means atonement time.
Now this does not mean that a bard could not use a wand of infernal healing in front of their Iomedaeing paladin friend. You can try to show the bard the error of his ways, but his sins are on him.