|
With the whole "armor that magically transfers damage" I think we're loosing sight on what we're talking about. Villians are generally DM/GM/whathaveyou controled beings, and as such can have some SUPER FUN unique abilities or artifacts...
Of course the 'Armour of the Dread Emperor' was just a magic item (+1 full plate in fact, plus the whole chains and manacles thing), not an artifact, so there's no reason your PCs can't knock a set or two out. Heck, in only has a market price of 14,650gp, and the only spell requisite is shield other (and in Pathfinder feel free to ignore that for a +5 to the crafting DC).
The 'Belt of the Dread Emperor' cost a more hefty 120,000gp but let you use your manacled buddies to fuel spellcasting. It only works for prepared spellcasters (because, as we all know, Sorcerers are not allowed nice things... or even vile and dark things apparantly...) and lets you recall a spell you've cast at the cost of the spell's level squared damage to the guy / gal / gimp you have manacled to you. Now that's a good reason to track down a masochistic troll if I ever saw one...
Only the 'Ring of the Dread Emperor' (anyone else notice that the Dread Emperor is really in a rut when it comes to naming his stuff?) was an artifact - and that's the bit which let you ignore all armour-based penalties... including the fact your armour and belt are manacled to a half-dozen other people - which, apparantly, is just an increased armour check penalty... (an additional -5... or a mere -2 if they're children... or nothing extra if they're subdued or controlled children...). I'm sure it's good that we have rules on this sort of thing... isn't it... isn't it..? ;)
What about midgets?? A kid i was friends with in college was utterly convinced they weren't people, and thus had no souls....
Everybody knows you'll be fine as long as they are orc or goblin babies, right?>:(
What about pugwampi babies? Is it fine then?
For the record anything you do to puppies is AOK.
I prefer to drown them in a bucket.
|
Assuming they're unwilling to be summoned. I'd say they're probably lining up for it in hopes of being summoned by someone who they can make suggestions to.
good summon creatures want to, or are on duty to, be helpful.
neutrals are probably bored out of their skulls.
Neutrals are on the damn fence, not making up their minds.
Pick a friggen side. Damn Neutrals and their neutral plots
What's the official alignment ruling on puppy stomping?
Rule 1: If evil undead warlocks sing about it, it's probably evil.
What about midgets?? A kid i was friends with in college was utterly convinced they weren't people, and thus had no souls....
Well, we know that all dwarves are bastards in the eyes of their fathers.
Can you put this enchantment on barding? Because that would actually be useful. Let the rider with fifteen hit dice take the damage instead of the horse with three.
You want to take a perfectly evil enchantment and corrupt it for your benevolent purposes? Shame on you!
What about pugwampi babies? Is it fine then?Everybody knows you'll be fine as long as they are orc or goblin babies, right?>:(
You do know what happens when you try to stab a pugwampi child in the face, right? Maybe you slip, maybe you have a spasm in your knife hand - it doesn't matter, you will end up with that knife within, your, person!
And the little freak will not pee itself laughing - not when you're such a nice moving (well, twitching) target!
So go ahead. Take a nice sharp knife and attack that pugwampi child. It's your funeral.
Neutrals are on the damn fence, not making up their minds.Pick a friggen side. Damn Neutrals and their neutral plots
They just have a better fence to be on the right side of. This boring "good" or "evil" stuff is irrelevant in the grand scheme of things.
The only thing that really matters is chaos and the dissolution of all order.
Someone who summons demons to do his/her dirty work -isn't- allying with demons. He's subjugating demons. The difference, I think, is clear. "Subjugating" means "to force into a serville state".
You and I rarely agree on anything, so I offer my hand in friendship since we're both on the same side for once.
RAW summoning a demon is an evil act. Rational thought dictates that isn't so. Either you can never apply rational thought to pathfinder, or the RAW are wrong.
Usually I side on the RAW in terms of making some logical argument (crossbows should pierce armor, for example) but I make a special exception for the alignment system which I find execrable.
Someone who summons demons to do his/her dirty work -isn't- allying with demons. He's subjugating demons. The difference, I think, is clear. "Subjugating" means "to force into a serville state".You and I rarely agree on anything, so I offer my hand in friendship since we're both on the same side for once.
RAW summoning a demon is an evil act. Rational thought dictates that isn't so. Either you can never apply rational thought to pathfinder, or the RAW are wrong.
Usually I side on the RAW in terms of making some logical argument (crossbows should pierce armor, for example) but I make a special exception for the alignment system which I find execrable.
Subjugating another thinking race/person/animal is evil, even if said race/person/animal is itself evil. So either you're forcing evil beings to help you, or your entering into a compact with them. Either way, evil. And don't go turning this against me, Good beings would help with good plots, so you're in agreement with them and they are helping, not being forced into servitude as you attempt to do to demons.
This is really not too hard an alignment question.
Subjugating another thinking race/person/animal is evil, even if said race/person/animal is itself evil.
Subjugating an animal is evil? Does that include war horses? Should a Cleric of a good God pray for forgiveness every day he doesn't free his war horse? How about a Cleric of the God of agriculture - is he committing blasphemy when he shows farmers how to hook up a mule to a plow?
Subjugating another thinking race/person/animal is evil, even if said race/person/animal is itself evil. So either you're forcing evil beings to help you, or your entering into a compact with them. Either way, evil. And don't go turning this against me, Good beings would help with good plots, so you're in agreement with them and they are helping, not being forced into servitude as you attempt to do to demons.This is really not too hard an alignment question.
Hear hear!
This is a pretty slippery slope. Killing is evil (as defined by the RULES) so killing germs is evil. You may think it's ridiculous, but it's the RULES. Oppression of animals as well. Do you have to be directly involved? What about anyone who eats meat, since you had to subjugate and/or kill an animal to get it.
|
This is a pretty slippery slope. Killing is evil (as defined by the RULES) so killing germs is evil. You may think it's ridiculous, but it's the RULES.
So what you're saying is that ALL adventurers are massively evil? Since they tend to go around killing things and taking their stuff. And the paladin's Smite Evil power is itself evil. In fact, no paladin should ever advance past his first adventure without falling.
So what you're saying is that ALL adventurers are massively evil? Since they tend to go around killing things and taking their stuff. And the paladin's Smite Evil power is itself evil. In fact, no paladin should ever advance past his first adventure without falling.
Yes. That's what I've been talking about on the Summoning evil makes you evil? thread. Contradictions make me a sad panda.
This is a pretty slippery slope. Killing is evil (as defined by the RULES) so killing germs is evil. You may think it's ridiculous, but it's the RULES.So what you're saying is that ALL adventurers are massively evil? Since they tend to go around killing things and taking their stuff. And the paladin's Smite Evil power is itself evil. In fact, no paladin should ever advance past his first adventure without falling.
RAW yes. Which is absurd. Which means the rules are broken.
The standard response is "well it just needs a heaping helping of rule 0" which is an absolutely legitimate argument. But if the alignment rules need constant DM fudging to make them work (as RULES mind you) then why have them at all? Why not put a line that says "ask your DM what is evil/good/lawful/chaotic in his campaign"?
(since it's too much of a sacred cow to just toss away entirely).*raised brow*
Oh, you mean business-wise?
You should know this as well as anyone. They didn't want to drastically change the rules even for the better because they wanted to play the familiarity card. Otherwise I'm sure PF would look more like Kirthfinder or whatever you call it.
Subjugating another thinking race/person/animal is evil, even if said race/person/animal is itself evil. So either you're forcing evil beings to help you, or your entering into a compact with them. Either way, evil. And don't go turning this against me, Good beings would help with good plots, so you're in agreement with them and they are helping, not being forced into servitude as you attempt to do to demons.This is really not too hard an alignment question.
Subjugating an animal is evil? Does that include war horses? Should a Cleric of a good God pray for forgiveness every day he doesn't free his war horse? How about a Cleric of the God of agriculture - is he committing blasphemy when he shows farmers how to hook up a mule to a plow?
DnD designers want us to use some quasi-Judao-Christian concept of good vs. evil. But using that standard, man has dominion over all these beings. By this standard, it is the natural order of things for man to subjugate these things to his will - just as normal as a lord subjugating a serf. The idea that "subjugating another thinking race/person/animal is evil" is arbitrary and has nothing to support it. Some good aligned beings might believe it's true (primarily chaotic good beings), but there's no reason to believe that all do.
Sorry, misphrased. Subjugating a sentient, i.e. at or near human level intelligence, creature is evil.
This is a pretty slippery slope. Killing is evil (as defined by the RULES) so killing germs is evil. You may think it's ridiculous, but it's the RULES. Oppression of animals as well. Do you have to be directly involved? What about anyone who eats meat, since you had to subjugate and/or kill an animal to get it.
Note: killing creatures is not evil, as defined by the rules. Murder is, but not killing. Self-defense, sustenance, to protect others, to stop evil... all are valid reasons to kill as per RAW.
Or one paragraph.
I think it'd take about six pages to work it all out.
Less like a paragraph, and more like two sentences.
Greg
I have a Paly player who insists on spiked armor. A BBEG with a child strapped to his shield weilding a sack full of babies...
might as well...
I was being modest.Less like a paragraph, and more like two sentences.
Greg
Greg
The key to avoiding the alignment change is to make sure a purpose is served in stabbing babies in the face. For example, if you stab a baby in the face for kicks, or cause you feel like it, then that's evil.
However, if you eat the baby meat afterwards so it doesn't go to waste, then stabbing the baby had a purpose, and it's no different than hunting ;)
Baby meat is good eating!
I'm actually quite sure I remember a villain from one of the splat books whose armor would transfer all damage he received to those chained to it. Naturally he used orphans.I remember that. More sensationalistic and 'edgy' than practical. (Orphans? Really? Were they out of disabled elderly nuns? Scraping the barrel there, in that dig for pathos.)
Seems like it'd be hell on the dodge bonus and on your ability to move around, having to delay your action until uncooperative orphan #4 decides that he's ready to shuffle in whatever direction you want to move. Pretty much constantly flat-footed, I'd think, too. All the downside of a 'three-legged sack race' only with *four* people chained to you...
Plus, human children have junk for hit points. This is clearly a case of 'evil is dumb' or 'for the lulz.'
Four cursed (works in reverse) rings of shield other on a quartet of trolls (or, yanno, zombie hydra, whatever) chained up in your basement seems like it would be a better investment. :)
Oh yes, that thing. My group called it "The Belt of Michael Jackson."
I think the best curse to put on someone who wears that is for them to simply not encounter any paladins. Let them wander around shackled to orphan children going "Are we there yet?" "Can we stop for a potty break, Mr. Dread Emperor, sir? I really gotta pee."
Honestly, even if evil is stupid and doing it for the lulz, one day of wandering around shackled to whiny incontinent children without a paladin in site to give a moral dilemma?
|
No, not even then. In the case of pugwampis, you want them to be old enough to know how much you hate them first.What about pugwampi babies? Is it fine then?Everybody knows you'll be fine as long as they are orc or goblin babies, right?>:(
I want them to be fully cognitive of my hate.
|
|
Example of good people binding demons to their will.
Subjugating another thinking race/person/animal is evil, even if said race/person/animal is itself evil.
Also King Solomon, who, in rabbinical lore and apocryphal texts commanded demons (and include the first reference to one named Asmodeus!) using either his own wisdom, the mandate of God (who gave him dominion over all things, men, animals, demons and angels) or a magic ring named the Seal of Solomon, depending on the story. Various tales have him commanding demons to go off and fetch stuff, or being given tribute of precious stones by demons, and this was right and proper (although he also did lots of un-proper stuff, like having a child by a woman who wasn't one of his wives, twice, and turning to the worship of other gods).
In D&D terms, if you get a demon or devil killed by summoning it and sending it into a fight, you've decreased the power of evil for 24 hours, while it reforms. If you get an angel or archon killed in this manner, you've weakened the legions of heaven for 24 hours. If you call them, instead of summon them, you can even cause permanant damage to the hosts of hell (or heaven).
.
Somewhere in the game-settings distant past, a planar scholar figured this out, and summoned and bound into circles hundreds of devils and demons, so that their power was trapped and unavailable to their fiendish masters.
Being that we don't sing praises of this mans genius, and repeat these procedures regularly, keeping the hells and abyss empty echoing wastelands, of no threat to anyone by calling forth and imprisoning their residents, it should be obvious that this didn't end well.
Did the demons break free and go on a terrible rampage that destroyed the empire this scholar called home? Did more powerful devils arrive unbidden and tear the man's soul into a thousand fragments and bind them separately, conscious and aware, but unable to free himself? Did inevitables show up in a mechanical legion and drag the man and his bound fiends away, for violating some unknown cosmic law?
Reports vary. Perhaps he simply died of old age, and in some buried vault far beneath [your kingdom here, or the Pathfinder Societies 'grant vault'] ten thousand fiends lie waiting to be discovered, and freed by some hapless explorer in search of 'adventure...'
Set i will say however that Demon was used as a catch all term for most supernatural entities when we started translating to latin.