|
Now I know there is probably no clear answer for this question.
I just saw “Secrets of the Dead” on PBS. This particular show was about Cortez and the Aztecs. Specifically a mass grave was uncovered that showed that the group which was sent after Cortez to “reign him in”, ended up on an Aztec sacrificial alter and then buried.
The show also went into the Spanish perspective and the Aztec perspective on human sacrifice.
From what I understand in the Pathfinder Role playing game every living thing ( and undead thing) thing has an alignment which is a combination of two elements which fall along two axis, good neutral and evil and law neutrality and chaos. This alignment exist objectively can be detected by simple class abilities and the Detect spells.
So my question is this: are good and evil culturally relative, or are there some things that are intrinsically evil and conversely intrinsically good, no matter the culture?
Lets take Human sacrifice specifically. Is human sacrifice culturally relatively evil, or is it intrinsically (regardless of culture) evil?
How about in the context of Golaron?
What do you all think?
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
[Philosophy hat on]
I think it's consent that would define this. "Freedom is the right of all sentient beings." In a world where the gods DO clearly answer and are shown to be actively involved in the world, volunteering to be sacrificed would be possible, and then 'taking one for the team' would not be an evil act.
So the high priest of (say) a tribe of Aroden worshipping primatives might agree to sacrifice 3 virgins as a way of saying "Dear god, we REALLY need your attention." Remember, Pathfinder deities are not omnipotent and all knowing by default.
I vaugely recall an example of a 'good' deity (in fiction, so alignment is always subjective) in the Valdemar books, instructing her shamans to assemble at the cardnial points of the crater that was their homeland, then to mass suicide and she'd repair the damage to their homeland.
[Philosophy hat off]
Testiment basically said, "Alignments apply, but when your god tells you to do something we'd call evil, it's still good." ;-)
In the rules context of Pathfinder. Human sacrifice is exclusively a ritual of worship favored by evil gods.
I don't however believe in such simplistic analysis of real world actions, especially when our understanding of a lost culture is so limited.
Reality and games are separate. Don't use the limited terms of the second to measure the far more complex issues of the first. And this isn't really the venue for serious discussions of ethics, morality, or cultural anthropology.
It is however the place to ask what the Golorion setting alignment ruling is. Personally, I would say yes it is in a D&D world (disregarding the real world). If it is inherently something evil does and good doesn't it is probably evil. Not to mention Murder is pretty well spelled out as evil. And it's hard to argue that ritually killing an intelligent humanoid as not being murder or evil. YMMV.
|
|
In the rules context of Pathfinder. Human sacrifice is exclusively a ritual of worship favored by evil gods.
N Fandarra, an ancient giant goddess, still has human(oid) sacrifice as an accepted practice. I believe it was implied an old contemporary, Erastil of all people, used to roll the same way but has long since abandoned such things. Possibly before shifting to LG? It was mentioned that he used to be a much bloodier god than he is now.
Considering N Naderi is a goddess of romantic suicides, I'm guessing most of those sacrifices are willing.
Is it ok to stab babies in the face if everyone else says it's ok?
Ritual suicide is another matter.
|
So my question is this: are good and evil culturally relative, or are there some things that are intrinsically evil and conversely intrinsically good, no matter the culture?
Lets take Human sacrifice specifically. Is human sacrifice culturally relatively evil, or is it intrinsically (regardless of culture) evil?
How about in the context of Golaron?
What do you all think?
Good and Evil in the D&D tradition are more tangible matters than in reality. So, they are more absolutes - quite often very tangible - than relative concepts.
I'd rather keep the intrinsical part out of the door, as it includes a mandatory part which I do not really approve of (nor need).In Golarion, things are a bit more hazy and dynamic, but good and evil stay as very definite and separate elements.
Human sacrifice is an evil act, but in some cultures (aligned with evil deities or philosophies) could be considered a good thing. Note that this popular idea does not revoke the evil nature of the act at all.
IIRC, in the Guide to Korvosa book, there's a small note about the consecration of the local temple of Asmodeus, which involved human sacrifice of willing victims. The larger population of the city considered the act abhorrent, but for the faithful - which have no intention of bringing harm to the populace - it was a positive element. The church even provided for the resurrection of the willing sacrifices - and some of them even choose to stay in Hell, considering it a reward!
However, even in the light of this contextualized moral relativism, there's no doubt that the act was evil, without a single doubt.
A god who has his priests to sacrifice the innocent to him, whether they're volunteers or not, is having his priests "destroy innocent life, whether for fun or profit." Therefore the god is evil. Volunteers for the sacrifice might well be good, demonstrating "the commitment to make sacrifices to protect or help others" that neutral characters lack. If the priests stick to sacrificing volunteers, they might manage to remain neutral themselves.
does a culture view it as evil? no, exhibit A: cheliax and the worship of asmadeus. They probaly view it as legal and lawful. Their priests/priestess probaly believe they are doing a good thing, they are following the state religion's orders and their god's orders.
However in a nation like Andoran they might disagree believing instead that it is a vile action. Not to mention a number of captured andoran freedom fighters likely wind up being sacrficed.
it all depends on the area, in one nation sacrfing a person is considered the lawful duty of the clergy and thus good to do. in another the exact opposite.
Creative Director
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Whether or not human sacrifice is evil in the real world is (unfortunately) up to debate (aka, I can't imagine it NOT being evil).
But as for Golarion, a world where things like evil are defined, yes—sacrifice of a thinking creature is evil. Sacrifice of an animal is not NECESSARILY evil though. It's just not nice.
Whether or not human sacrifice is evil in the real world is (unfortunately) up to debate (aka, I can't imagine it NOT being evil).
But as for Golarion, a world where things like evil are defined, yes—sacrifice of a thinking creature is evil. Sacrifice of an animal is not NECESSARILY evil though. It's just not nice.
What about willing creatures?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
For me, that sums up most threads.
When the sacrifices are made so the community survives, like in Fandarra's faith or druidism, for example against famine, it's neutral alignment.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Just because the rules say something is evil, though, doesn't mean that the people involved see it that way. Or the folks watching them. Or the gods granting spells to the participants. Our gods have personalities and are not absolutes, and therefore can make mistakes or be wrong about things. So while there may be objective evil and good in the game--how do you know what it is? I'm not talking rules, I'm talking in-game. Who sets your standard for good vs. evil? Who enforces it? Your patron god? How do you know they're trustworthy, when a bunch of other deities have their own competing standards? And what about the concept of necessary evil? Seems to me that a whole lot of crusading holy warriors fighting for a righteous cause still leave a swath of destruction in their wake. What about the innocent family members of those "evil" villains they killed? Are their tears less valid?
The point I'm trying to make is that a little confusion about the nature of good and evil adds spice to a game. Cultural relativism FTW!
(Disclaimer: I know people want official answers, but there's no need to cut off a whole avenue of your roleplaying experience just because Jacobs, or I, or Sean, or somebody else gives our opinion, or even an "official" stance. It's your game--both you AND your characters can decide for yourselves what morality and religion mean to you!)
|
Creative Director
|
Just because the rules say something is evil, though, doesn't mean that the people involved see it that way. Or the folks watching them. Or the gods granting spells to the participants. Our gods have personalities and are not absolutes, and therefore can make mistakes or be wrong about things. So while there may be objective evil and good in the game--how do you know what it is? I'm not talking rules, I'm talking in-game. Who sets your standard for good vs. evil? Who enforces it? Your patron god? How do you know they're trustworthy, when a bunch of other deities have their own competing standards? And what about the concept of necessary evil? Seems to me that a whole lot of crusading holy warriors fighting for a righteous cause still leave a swath of destruction in their wake. What about the innocent family members of those "evil" villains they killed? Are their tears less valid?
The point I'm trying to make is that a little confusion about the nature of good and evil adds spice to a game. Cultural relativism FTW!
(Disclaimer: I know people want official answers, but there's no need to cut off a whole avenue of your roleplaying experience just because Jacobs, or I, or Sean, or somebody else gives our opinion, or even an "official" stance. It's your game--both you AND your characters can decide for yourselves what morality and religion mean to you!)
And just because you're a great writer doesn't mean you can bend or break the rules about what is and isn't evil! :-)
And just because you're a great writer doesn't mean you can bend or break the rules about what is and isn't evil! :-)
I don't have to. All I have to do is make you question them. :D
|
Creative Director
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What about willing creatures?Whether or not human sacrifice is evil in the real world is (unfortunately) up to debate (aka, I can't imagine it NOT being evil).
But as for Golarion, a world where things like evil are defined, yes—sacrifice of a thinking creature is evil. Sacrifice of an animal is not NECESSARILY evil though. It's just not nice.
Once a creature is "willing" that starts to be more martyrdom or madness than anything else. The willing creature isn't necessarily evil, but if the one performing the sacrifice is doing so to something that's insane, yes, that sacrificer is still evil, I would say. Furthermore, any deity that would accept a live willing Int 3 or higher sacrifice is probably evil itself, and the act of offering worship to such a creature (which includes offering sacrifices, be they live or not) is evil.
Isn´t human sacrifice a bit redundant in a world where you can buy an ressurection?
Sure, it´s not cheap, but some snot-nosed noble kids could possibly afford going through the process once or more a day.
Think about it, thrill-seeking, young and rich hedonists looking for the ultimate thrill? Being ritually sacrificed, experiencing death and a taste of whatever after-life was the flavor of the week, and retuning to life again half an hour later?
Necronauting could possibly be, nay is, the ultimate thrill you can experience, ever!
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
Isn´t human sacrifice a bit redundant in a world where you can buy an ressurection?
Sure, it´s not cheap, but some snot-nosed noble kids could possibly afford going through the process once or more a day.
Think about it, thrill-seeking, young and rich hedonists looking for the ultimate thrill? Being ritually sacrificed, experiencing death and a taste of whatever after-life was the flavor of the week, and retuning to life again half an hour later?
Necronauting could possibly be, nay is, the ultimate thrill you can experience, ever!
Depends. If someone's willingly sacrificed to his goddess, why would he want to come back?
More metastory, if innocent Bill is sacrificed to the god of murder, and the party turns to the goddess of fluffy bunnies (who he worshipped) to bring him back, will she be willing to get the soul from murder-god when the soul clearly had 'due process'? Also does murder-god have the soul, or does fluffy-bunny-goddess get it?
See what he did there?I don't have to. All I have to do is make you question them. :D
And just because you're a great writer doesn't mean you can bend or break the rules about what is and isn't evil! :-)
Mengkare is good!
So while there may be objective evil and good in the game--how do you know what it is?
Oh, that's easy. First, you ask a paladin. They almost never lie (a fact that can be discovered by observation), and they can reliably detect which clerics have auras of the kind they can detect. That gives you a list of clerics of deities that we'll call "Type 1".
You can then ask a lot of clerics, preferably under the effects of anti-lying magic, about which gods have clerics that set off the spell named detect good, which we'll call a "Type 2" aura. It's reasonably easy to set this up to get a good solid statistical handle on which gods have "Type 1" clerics, which ones have "Type 2" clerics, and which are neither.
Now, we can sit back and see what kinds of actions are advocated and undertaken by Type 1 clerics, and which are advocated and undertaken by Type 2 clerics. We will soon see a huge correlation between Type 1 clerics not caring about harm to the innocent, while Type 2 clerics seem to put effort into protecting the innocent.
This of course doesn't give us Absolute Guaranteed Received By Revelation Truth, but it's good enough for a Bayesian analysis.
|
Oh, that's easy. First, you ask a paladin.
What? No, no.
The Good Gods actually write and publish books about what Good is. Like divinely authored rulebooks. And if after reading those books you're still confused, you can contact the author and ask for a clarification on a ruling. Which will be Absolute Guaranteed Received By Revelation Truth.
Isn´t human sacrifice a bit redundant in a world where you can buy an ressurection?
Sure, it´s not cheap, but some snot-nosed noble kids could possibly afford going through the process once or more a day.
Think about it, thrill-seeking, young and rich hedonists looking for the ultimate thrill? Being ritually sacrificed, experiencing death and a taste of whatever after-life was the flavor of the week, and retuning to life again half an hour later?
Necronauting could possibly be, nay is, the ultimate thrill you can experience, ever!
If I'm a god (of any alignment) and someone gives me their soul (aka sacrifice) I may not want to share my toys (aka your soul) just because some tiny mortal cleric cast a spell asking for it. I'm (aka the deity) taking my ball (aka your soul) and going home (aka outer plane). Good luck getting it back.
Oh, that's easy. First, you ask a paladin.What? No, no.
The Good Gods actually write and publish books about what Good is.
Sure, but how do you know which gods are which? I've got a direct book of divine revelation here from Norgorber saying:
"Greed, for lack of a better word, is good. Greed is right. Greed works. Greed clarifies, cuts through, and captures, the essence of the evolutionary spirit. Greed, in all of its forms; greed for life, for money, for love, knowledge, has marked the upward surge of mankind and greed, you mark my words, will not only save the Inner Sea, but the whole of Golarion."
|
|
Sure, but how do you know which gods are which?Oh, that's easy. First, you ask a paladin.What? No, no.
The Good Gods actually write and publish books about what Good is.
DC 10 Knowledge (Religion) check, I would think. That has to be pretty common knowledge, right?
I've got a direct book of divine revelation here from Norgorber saying:
"Greed, for lack of a better word, is good. Greed is right. Greed works. Greed clarifies, cuts through, and captures, the essence of the evolutionary spirit. Greed, in all of its forms; greed for life, for money, for love, knowledge, has marked the upward surge of mankind and greed, you mark my words, will not only save the Inner Sea, but the whole of Golarion."
Also, the priests of the Good Gods have access to the Good domain. Let's see a priest of Norgorber pull that off.
More seriously, I would think commoners would be able to tell the good priests from the bad priests pretty easily. The good priests can channel positive energy, cast tons of healing spells, summon angels and celestial beings -- actually, let me pause on that one.
Two first level clerics, one LG (Iomedae) and the other LE (Asmodeous), get into a theological debate in the town square, gathering a crowd. Harsh words are exchanged. One of them starts to cast Summon Monster 1, the other says "Hah! I have that memorized too!" and cast it himself. The good cleric summons a celestial eagle. Beautiful, majestic, shimmering with golden light. Evil cleric summons an infernal viper. Black scales, glowing red eyes, wicked spikes running down its length. Do you really think anyone watching is going to have a hard time figuring out which one is the good guy?
Look at pictures of these evil priests. Look at every scary, nasty, dangerous place in a fantasy world that will kill you and that, if you're a commoner, you should stay far, far away from. Notice the aesthetic similarities? Notice how these evil priests in their black leather with skulls and pentagrams look like they belong in those evil crypts full of undead horrors?
Yeah, that's a clue that you shouldn't believe them when they try to tell you what "good" is. I think most people pick up on the clue.
If you want to pick a Golarion god that probably does engender real confusion over which side he's on, look at Abadar. His church is strongly interested in a prosperous society of laws and social order, I suspect the vast majority of his LN priests channel positive energy and summon celestial critters, he has a strong contingent of LG priests, he has Paladins, and consequently a lot of people in generally good nations will see the church as being good. But since Abadar teaches that "good" is "getting along with evil," his neutrality would have a corrupting effect on society.
The corruption in Abadar's philosophy would probably be stunningly obvious in Cheliax, where the church of Abadar is chummy with the church of Asmodeous. I think the people of Chelix generally understand that the King of Hell is a bad guy.
Sacrifice of an animal is not NECESSARILY evil though. It's just not nice.
It *is* when the sacrifice is to the great god of charcoal and flame!
I think that is a bit to simple Gailbraithe; though might work if you do not want shades of grey and want the 'evil' guys to be doing stuff for the evulz and good guys being obviously good.
However you do bring up an intresting thought, that all good creatures are good looking to some degree. So a cleric of Asmodeus could argue that 'good' clerics could pick on ugly people for the fiends are ugly thus ugly=evil and beauty=good; in additon one can argue that good people bind their souls to celestials just the same as one binds a soul to a devil save the celestial expects more and gives less.
Anyways from my reading of cheliax, I do not think they view him as a bad guy. on the opposite they view him as a good guy. His church after all brought order to the chaos of the civil war. Asmodeus is after all an ancient diety who helped forge the contract of the all-life. So serving him just means acknowlidgin the creator of life.
In additon they likely have a diffrent 'regional varation' on the deities. Particularly one like Iomedae who is viewed as to what a lawful chelish person can aspire to, she was cheliaxan afterall. In addition I do suspect the order of the Godclaw's view of her would gain popularity particularly with the goverment. that view is btw that she is a rightious crusader fighting against all that is choatic in the world if I read it correctly. they play down her good and play up her law and I like this little variation of her.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If a paladin has a flesh golem arm, and he dies, is his real arm waiting for him in heaven?
Sure, but how do you know which gods are which?DC 10 Knowledge (Religion) check, I would think. That has to be pretty common knowledge, right?
Right, but how do people learn it in the first place so that it can become common knowledge? The inhabitants of the world don't have a rulebook to reference, after all. Why should I believe Shelyn is telling the truth and Norgorber is lying rather than the opposite?
The whole "ask a paladin" chain is about solving the problem of figuring out which gods are good and which ones are evil. After you know that, of course you can just ask the good gods what's good. But somebody has to do the figuring out in the first place. The reliability of "just ask the good gods what's good" can never exceed the reliability of the method used to determine which gods were good in the first place.
There are other ways to do the "figure out what gods are good in the first place" than starting with paladins as Geiger counters, but they tend to involve more ambiguity, and thus larger observation periods to reduce error.
Also, the priests of the Good Gods have access to the Good domain. Let's see a priest of Norgorber pull that off.
Nobody has the rulebook that tells them what the good domain is, or that it can only be used by the good. Those are things that would have to be determined by observation.
The good cleric summons a celestial eagle. Beautiful, majestic, shimmering with golden light. Evil cleric summons an infernal viper. Black scales, glowing red eyes, wicked spikes running down its length. Do you really think anyone watching is going to have a hard time figuring out which one is the good guy?
Bah! Everybody knows the evil logically would be attractive to help seduce you into wrongness and the good would be ugly and disturbing to test if you're prejudiced!
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think that is a bit to simple Gailbraithe; though might work if you do not want shades of grey and want the 'evil' guys to be doing stuff for the evulz and good guys being obviously good.
I don't really get the point of playing D&D/Pathfinder in shades of grey when pretty much everything about the game is geared towards heroic high fantasy with epic battles between good and evil. It's kind of like taking the magic out of it.
Plus, how real is the "shades of gray" when on one side you have the god/dess of love, art, beauty, wine, partying, good luck, family, home, community, and protection, and the other hand you have the guys responsible for every crime, monster, broken heart, sexually transmitted disease, bad batch of beer, zit, and plot to destroy the entire universe.
Compare Heaven and Hell. In Hell you have the world if there with no Good. In Heaven the world with no Evil.
However you do bring up an interesting thought, that all good creatures are good looking to some degree. So a cleric of Asmodeus could argue that 'good' clerics could pick on ugly people for the fiends are ugly thus ugly=evil and beauty=good;
Except good clerics don't pick on ugly people, because that would be mean. And thus not good.
in additon one can argue that good people bind their souls to celestials just the same as one binds a soul to a devil save the celestial expects more and gives less.
Is there anything in the RAW that backs that up? Because its always seemed to me that the evil powers trick you into eternal slavery with contracts you can never get out of, while the celestial grants you eternal life in paradise if you can earn your way in. Heaven is hard to get into because its awesome, Hell is easy to get into because it sucks so much.
|
|
In additon they likely have a diffrent 'regional varation' on the deities. Particularly one like Iomedae who is viewed as to what a lawful chelish person can aspire to, she was cheliaxan afterall. In addition I do suspect the order of the Godclaw's view of her would gain popularity particularly with the goverment. that view is btw that she is a rightious crusader fighting against all that is choatic in the world if I read it correctly. they play down her good and play up her law and I like this little variation of her.
There's another example of this with Sarenrae's more extreme Dawncult, who've been noted as worshipping a harsher, more N vision of that goddess. IIRC, that cult was listed as mostly neutral and they had a hand in everything getting out of hand during the Oath Wars.
There's also the persecuted status of Sarenrae's faith in Taldor to consider, even at the same time that they loves them some Shelyn and Cayden. And the rampant corruption in her church in Qadira(and possibly Katapesh) that makes them as much a part of the slavery problem as they are the solution.
Lots of nice range to explore within the faithful of just one goddess who is willing to try and redeem even the evil gods, minus Rovagug because, seriously, @#$% Rovagug.
I got my bit from the Simpsons Sundayschool question barrage......
If SCUD is SCUD the Disposable Assassin,....I just tried to look at it, but the website was too painful to look at......too much YELLOW and POLKADOTS.
An innocent sacrificed on the altar to the god of murder does not have his soul sent to the God of Murder.The ACT is the sacrifice, not the soul. The only entities in the game that can deflect a soul from its rightful course are astradaemons, who are loathed by all entities who deal with souls.
So, the goddess of fluffy bunnies has no problems raising the innocent child...his soul is already hers.
===Aelryinth
Which still doesn't mean your god gets their souls.
You don't really think a paladin sacrificed on a diabolic altar is going to Hell, do yoU? That's not the way the game works. It takes specific devotion or Selling Your Soul to send a soul to a specific location...the sacrificer does NOT get to do so.
Thematically, it sounds good, but most characters aren't wielding Stormbringer, and offering blood and souls doesn't mean Arioch is actually coming down to eat either. He's just acknowledging a sacrifice in his name.
==Aelryinth
Un-willing victims are definitely Cosmically Evil (i.e. objectively evil) in Golarion, I was going to say that willing victims wouldn`t be quite as Evil until James Jacobs` 2nd comment, but I guess that would still be Evil-tinged in that case... Perhaps less so, so perhaps more `tangential` participants wouldn`t be quite as tinged with Evil, but the main perpetrators would probably eventually BECOME Evil sooner or later. Them`s the breaks. Plane-shift to Earth if you want MORE moral ambiguity :-)
Now it was brought up that different cultures view things differently. They can call things good or evil, or can call good `weak chumps` and evil `powerful dominion`, if you get my meaning. All that every informed being could agree on would be that there ARE these two axes, what they think of them or define them as is up to their own perspective. I think it would be interesting to explore that even within a given society, you could have competing `explanations` of the axes, imagine not just good and evil, but law and chaos having different adherents... lets say `harmony and savagery` is one camp, and `tyranny and freedom` is another perspective. All these perspectives reference the same thing, so different people can discuss the same stuff, recognize the same auras, etc, while still fitting into their world-views.
So while there may be objective evil and good in the game--how do you know what it is?
Cast detect evil, of course. I mean, it detects evil -- it's right there in the name of the spell. Hence, what it detects is evil. :)
(Me, I dislike alignments. If I was less lazy, I would do away with them. But paladins are already powerful enough, so I'd have to figure out a way to redo smite, and it just doesn't seem to be quite worth it yet. I'm still waiting on those variant alignment rules Ryan Dancey said would be in the 3.0 DMG...)
|
|
An innocent sacrificed on the altar to the god of murder does not have his soul sent to the God of Murder.The ACT is the sacrifice, not the soul. The only entities in the game that can deflect a soul from its rightful course are astradaemons, who are loathed by all entities who deal with souls.
Those guys are probably the most visible, but there's a lot of other ways for it to happen. Balor Lords can straight up swallow someone's soul and poop them out as a demon. I think there's a devil that can pull off stealing souls outright as well. At least one other high level daemon type can do it, but more worrying is that the lowest type, cacodaemons(which can be taken as familiar!) pretty much just do this, and have a frighteningly easy time of it as well. (but yeah, the daemons do catch most of the hate, considering what they do with souls)
Besides those guys and the ususal fey/fiend trickery, there's one surefire way to sacrifice someone to the dark god of your choice and make certain that they get the soul. Possible Council of Thieves spoiler ahead:
I think there's been references to people selling the souls of their descendants as well, but that struck me as really cheating the system and hard to get by Pharasma.
While I love James Jacobs and the other folks who have a had in Pathfinder's creation giving their input on various topics, I always thought that having higher-ups put their view on morality threads to be potentially harmful.
Once a creature is "willing" that starts to be more martyrdom or madness than anything else. The willing creature isn't necessarily evil, but if the one performing the sacrifice is doing so to something that's insane, yes, that sacrificer is still evil, I would say. Furthermore, any deity that would accept a live willing Int 3 or higher sacrifice is probably evil itself, and the act of offering worship to such a creature (which includes offering sacrifices, be they live or not) is evil.
I feel like I needed to respond to this because it just screamed judgmental to me.
Now, in Golarion, that's fine, evil gods get sacrifices of things int 3 or higher and that's evil or what-have-you.
But I would like to mention that saying an individual willing to sacrifice themselves for their god is potentially a form of madness to be a loaded value statement. Especially since meso-american cultures that practiced sacrifice did so in the belief that their god needed the nourishment to continue the movement of the sun, and failure to regularly sacrifice folks would result in no daylight and the death of their god.
Sacrifice was considered an honor among a people who had a very much different perspective of death than we do.
Now, when it comes to Golarion, there's a very distinct thing that happens when you die, so it's easier to make certain actions (like human sacrifice) be intrinsically evil.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
An innocent sacrificed on the altar to the god of murder does not have his soul sent to the God of Murder.The ACT is the sacrifice, not the soul. The only entities in the game that can deflect a soul from its rightful course are astradaemons, who are loathed by all entities who deal with souls.
So, the goddess of fluffy bunnies has no problems raising the innocent child...his soul is already hers.
===Aelryinth
See, this has always bugged me. What exactly is evil deity #5 gaining from the sacrifice then? 70 years of life (assuming a child)? Souls I could see, as barter if nothing else. "Why yes, goddess of fluffy bunnies. My evil priest did sacrifice that nursery to me. Now one of your paladins executed my high priest last week, and you're claiming the soul as being given to you by your executioner. I'll make you a deal..."
One of the lines that I thought was awesome from Tome of Horrors (novel) was when the main character kills the evil priest, sentencing him to be chained before Hieronious's throne for eternity. Why would he bother saying that if the guy's soul was going straight to Hextor anyway?
|
|
Thank you all for posting your answers and thoughts. I wont have time to respond to everyone, but thank you for posting
Mr. Jacobs, I happen to be on the same page as you with the sacrificing of human or “sentient" as an evil act.
Mr. Sutter while I agree the Golaron gods can make mistakes, however, I doubt a god would mistake human sacrifice for a good act. I suppose your patron gods would set the rules for what is right and wrong. I guess it is plausible that an evil god or more likely Demon Lord, or Duke of hell, might try and trick a populace into thinking he was “good” and he might fool the population into thinking that human sacrifice is for the good of all, but it still is an evil act.
Mr. Sutter while some things are probably culturally relative on Golaron, such as dress, language, and well culture, I think with the objectiveness of good and evil, that transcends cultural relativity. I think there are some beings like devils and demons that are intrinsically evil and some acts that are intrinsically evil: for example murder, slavery, rape, human sacrifice, etc. I’m sure I can add to this list.
While I agree it is fun to blur things a little bit, for example, having to work with a succubus, a vampire, a Chelaxian devil binder, in order to defeat a greater evil, adds some spice to the game, I do think there are some things that are evil.
Mad Bettle, what an interesting idea for the Idle rich….
Hmm, speaking of available raise dead and resurrection spells, how does inheritance laws fit in?
See, well you have unearthed the Gordon Geecko of Golaron in a dark cloak. “greed is good”. Well I think people can figure it out for themselves….and I’m sure “ greed is good” is what Norgerbergers cultist tell themselves as they run a blackmail ring.
Gailbraith you make a good point about
“I don't really get the point of playing D&D/Pathfinder in shades of grey when pretty much everything about the game is geared towards heroic high fantasy with epic battles between good and evil. It's kind of like taking the magic out of it.”
Also, I do appreciate it when Mr Sutter, and Mr. Jacobs puts their two cents in, their thoughts. I don’t take their posts as an absolute ruling but the sharing of an opinion.
Well thank you all for posting, I will continue to read the thread.
See, this has always bugged me. What exactly is evil deity #5 gaining from the sacrifice then?
Evil. Misery. A life lost.
Getting someone to sacrifice someone else means they corrupt their own soul some more - and if you're a trickster deity, making them tell themselves that they're doing it for the greater good is even more fun.
Evil gods gain power (or simply satisfaction) from evil and the things that are part of their portfolio. So the god of murder becomes a bit stronger each time murder is committed.
And a life lost is useful, too. Even if it is just a year. Deny the victim chances to do good or even live.
Maybe it's not that much, but "not that much" times a killion is way more than "a lot" times one.
70 years of life (assuming a child)?
You're assuming a human child here. An elven child could easily get 10 times as much time.
Souls I could see, as barter if nothing else.
If that were true, our actions would mean nothing. All that mattered would be power - because those with power will decide the souls' fate.
Your parents were poor but pious followers of Erastil? Doesn't matter, because a priest of Rovagug killed you on an altar and Old Deadeye didn't have anything to trade for your soul.
One of the lines that I thought was awesome from Tome of Horrors (novel) was when the main character kills the evil priest, sentencing him to be chained before Hieronious's throne for eternity. Why would he bother saying that if the guy's soul was going straight to Hextor anyway?
Because he's mad. Or because there is no Hieronious in Pathfinder.