The government isn't trying to pretend that the draft is "good". Beneficial, "patriotic", or whatever; yeah. But not good.
And? It's patriotic and lawful. Yep, "good" in this course is a point of view.
A 911 call can't even compare. You opt into emergency response knowing full well what responsibilities come with the job. Angels haven't opted to do anything. Just because an angel is good and they fight evil doesn't make them in any way obligated to help you. Planar Binding is enslavement.
And angelic beings haven't "opted in"? Read the descriptions, it's what they do. Volunteer or draftee doesn't matter once you're on the job. They fight evil. You're not inviting them to a tea party. If you are, they probably won't do it.
Huh?? No. This is more like if you had set a trap for your neighbor, imprisoned him in your basement, and then forced him to bargain with you; favors in return for freedom. 911 is a job with responsibilities that you consent to when you take the job. There is no comparison.
Not if he's a cop. Not if you call and they send him. You, didn't pick him (unless you call one by name). And the basement trap is only an appropriate analogy if you force him to stay.
Sure the Angel shows up is trapped and agrees to help with the demon invasion. However after the fact you have to travel to its home plane for a mcguffin. The once bound angel has it what are the chances your getting it with ease and simplicity unless something of huge importance to the angel's diety hangs in the balance.
Ashiel, the "differences" are important when it comes to killing. Killing for sustenence is called hunting or (for a butcher) part of the job. Killing in self-defense is just that - defense. Killing some one just because is murder. Killing for pay is being a mercenary or an assassin. Killing a demon is just that - killing a demon (given the literal nature of what a demon is, killing them is as justified as killing in self-defense).
Arguing that all killing is evil by the rules is semantics too, since only the evil alignments mention it, it must be evil. Which is nonsense. Who/what you kill and why you kill them and how you kill them vary much matters.
TL;DR: killing is all alignments based on who/what, why and how.
Well you're arguing for an entirely black and white system, so the differences aren't important. I'm not suggesting that I think casting [Evil] spells or doing Evil things is innately neutral, or innately good, merely that circumstances change the way it is reflected on a character. If a Paladin lopped off some citizen's head 'cause he felt like it, I would see that a blatantly evil. If a Fighter lopped off a bandit's head who was trying to kill that citizen, I'd see it as Good (the circumstances make the kill action more neutral, and he's also displayng Altruism by sticking his neck out for someone else). If a conjurer summoned a fiendish bison to run over the bandit, then I'm going to assume the overall action was at the very least Neutral (even if you wanted to argue that casting an Evil spell is somehow more evil than killing someone because you feel you're justified, which frankly the RAW doesn't even come close to suggesting).
All I'm saying is what's good for the goose is good for the gander. Either everything is black and white or there are shades of gray. If everything is black and white, I assure you that to play the game as everyone says it is intended will lead you 100% into the realm of evil. If there are shades of gray, then you can justify.
Also, I don't prescribe to the campaign specific nonsense that MDT has been saying since nothing he has noted about his "toxic waste" theory is supported by the rules in the least, and also makes little sense. Otherwise wizards are going to be exceptionally evil in this black and white world since every time they cast fireball, burning hands, and scorching ray they are knowingly contributing to flash fires, blazing houses, droughts, raised temperatures, the polar ice caps melting to flood and destroy everyone, etc.
Logic people. Let's use it here.
And? It's patriotic and lawful. Yep, "good" in this course is a point of view.
"Dissent is the highest form of patriotism" ~ A wise man
And angelic beings haven't "opted in"? Read the descriptions, it's what they do. Volunteer or draftee doesn't matter once you're on the job. They fight evil. You're not inviting them to a tea party. If you are, they probably won't do it.
Opting in to fight evil doesn't mean that you opted to be at the beck and call of every wizard in the world who whisks you away without warning to do their bidding. So no, absolutely not. They haven't opted in.
Not if he's a cop. Not if you call and they send him. You, didn't pick him (unless you call one by name). And the basement trap is only an appropriate analogy if you force him to stay.
Cops consent to being on call when they take the job. Angels did not consent to be at anyone's beck and call. They fight evil on their terms not yours.
Also, you have to force him to stay. The spell is instantaneous cast and is not dismissible. Though you could ask him to do something trivial to end the spell.
Umm none of those spells catch things on fire btw.
Though i agree that a black and white system is dumb i look at each action and weigh it against other alteratives and against how the action is taken.
If your summoner is evil he had to get a fiendish bison. If he is neutral then one might ask why did he choose fiendish. If the bandit was using an energy type that the bison was protected from then sure good reason if it was just cuz its better than the celestial now your getting evil.
The fighter killed a man thats bad. He did it to protect the innocent thats good. He could have knocked the man out thats better than killing him.
Both could have made choices that are more good than they did however both reached a state of balance in their actions that i feel had a net change of zilch to their alignment.
The trap does not really matter. You can use the binding spell to bring the ally here, and convince it to help or force it to help.PS:I do think both spells should have been one spell, and the option to force or ask nicely would determine the alignment.
PS:I think he meant to say Binding which is why he mentioned trapping it.
Here again you go injecting what you'd like to be into things.
Planar Binding is outsider kidnapping. Plain and simple it is a trap.
The good outsider was off saving people and/or their souls instead of defending someone from some nastiness those poor innocents are left on their own and now suddenly their protector is yanked away from his duty into a specially prepared cage.
Now people are saying that the person who does this vile thing to this paragon is going to say 'well know that I've got your attention let's be friends'.. meanwhile whatever important work they were doing has been lost, they've been abducted, and this is a good thing?
That's the absolute height of absurdity and trying to turn a blind eye to things here,
James
I am not changing anything. The spell is designed to keep the outsider prisoner until it agrees or escapes. I never disagreed with that. I am saying that nobody is forcing you to use the spell that way.
You assuming the outsider was doing something is just there to make yourself look right. The neutral situation is to assume the outsider was not doing anything. What if I want to assume the outsider was being held prisoner by some devils, and I just helped it escape?
Do I think that just because the game intends for X to be evil that a GM must follow that idea? Nope, but I do think that to argue against it as an intended stance on alignments is mind boggling though.I think that the core rules intend individual GMs to make judgment calls on what they think is evil (or good/lawful/chaotic) and what they think is not.
I don't think that the core rules intend anything to be automatically one or another, rather I believe the intent is that alignment is a more complicated thing than that.
Why do I believe that the core rules intend alignment to work this way?
Because that's what they directly state.
It doesn't take a leap of logic, circular reasoning, or deciding that when they say 'X' they don't really mean 'X' but rather 'Y' because that fits things better into the way I'd like it to be.
-James
So if I make my own game, and I tell you ____ was my intent, even though I did not write it clearly I think it is pretty easy to assume that my intent was the intent.
I am not disagreeing about what is written, as has already been stated, the rules don't say in exact words evil spells equal evil actions. What I am saying is that you can go by previous stories being against such things, with rules that support such views, along with devs stating intent or you can ignore such things.
It is just like how in the first Golarion Campaign book(3.5) there is nothing stating clerics had to have deities in exact words. James said the intent was there. At that point I have two choices. I can go by the book, or by James intention.
I think we agree that intentions don't equal rules though which is why I drop the rules part a long time ago. At best you can say James misinterpreted the intent of the 3.5 core rules, but PF is not 3.5, and I could probably get one of the 3.5 devs to support James version of things if I went googling. Now I know it would not change what is actually written, but the intent issue would be harder to argue against at that point.
"Dissent is the highest form of patriotism" ~ A wise manOpting in to fight evil doesn't mean that you opted to be at the beck and call of every wizard in the world who whisks you away without warning to do their bidding. So no, absolutely not. They haven't opted in.
And do you really think that you're jacking somebody out of the angelic choir? That some celestial bureacrat is being whisked away from his desk? That your mortal spell is going to take some angel that the deity doesn't want you to?
Cops consent to being on call when they take the job. Angels did not consent to be at anyone's beck and call. They fight evil on their terms not yours.Also, you have to force him to stay. The spell is instantaneous cast and is not dismissible. Though you could ask him to do something trivial to end the spell.
Yes they do. I'm married to one. As I said, do you think you're grabbing some civilian with this spell? Who just happens to show up ready to kick @ss? They may do the boy scout bit, always prepared, but that's the point. They're prepared. As for the "something", "Wait one second. You're good to go".
Depends did you use his proper name if so then yes the rules say diety or no you got The angel you asked for no matter what he was doing.
Depends did you use his proper name if so then yes the rules say diety or no you got The angel you asked for no matter what he was doing.
It says a god can't block a mortal spell involving one of his / her / its servants? Not directly. More likely (imo) you get the same cop (whose name you know) that you called last time. If you go further up the food chain it would have to be with the consent of the deity. Just my opinion, but I'd say a god pretty much has control over it's home territory.
And do you really think that you're jacking somebody out of the angelic choir? That some celestial bureacrat is being whisked away from his desk? That your mortal spell is going to take some angel that the deity doesn't want you to?
YES!!! You aren't creating a brand new temporary angel. Angels aren't siting at the planar police stations waiting for wizards to give the word. Like it or not, angels have lives, and when you cast Planar Binding you are interrupting somebodies day. Angels aren't civil servents. They aren't obligated to do anything for you. DO they fight evil? Hell yeah. On their terms, not yours. Casting Planar Binding isn't like calling the Ghost Busters!
As I said, do you think you're grabbing some civilian with this spell? Who just happens to show up ready to kick @ss? They may do the boy scout bit, always prepared, but that's the point. They're prepared. As for the "something", "Wait one second. You're good to go".
Superman: "Where am I? How did I get here? Damn you Lex, send me back!"
Lex Luthor: "No. Your like a cop Superman, and that means you must do whatever I ask of you. If you want to be free again you need to do what I say now!"
Casting Planar Binding isn't like calling the Ghost Busters!
Oh but that would be SO COOL.
Also, there's nothing stopping that for potentially being the case. We don't really know for a fact, and it's up to GM discression on whether the outsider had something to do. Though the following would be a kinda cute interaction.
Wizard: *casts planar binding*
Angel: "Uhhh, sorry bud but I can't help you today"
Wizard: "Lul Wut?"
Angel: "Yeah, I have to pick my kid up from Soccer practice and I'm already late"
Wizard: 0.o?
I need to create some type of flavor as to how this spell works with regards to a selected outsider. I think if it was truly random you might call an outsider at a very bad time, and get in trouble with their boss.
Since they are subject to the spell it would make sense that unprotected(no real boss or mission) outsiders are the ones that can be called, unless you know their true name.
This is not a rule though, but it makes more sense than calling outsider #23433 to the material plane.
It says a god can't block a mortal spell involving one of his / her / its servants? Not directly. More likely (imo) you get the same cop (whose name you know) that you called last time. If you go further up the food chain it would have to be with the consent of the deity. Just my opinion, but I'd say a god pretty much has control over it's home territory.
Depends did you use his proper name if so then yes the rules say diety or no you got The angel you asked for no matter what he was doing.
School conjuration (calling) [see text]; Level sorcerer/wizard 5
Casting Time 10 minutes
Components V, S
Range close (25 ft. + 5 ft./2 levels); see text
Target one elemental or outsider with 6 HD or less
Duration instantaneous Saving Throw Will negates; Spell Resistance no and yes; see text Casting this spell attempts a dangerous act: to lure a creature from another plane to a specifically prepared trap, which must lie within the spell’s range. The called creature is held in the trap until it agrees to perform one service in return for its freedom.
To create the trap, you must use a magic circle spell, focused inward. The kind of creature to be bound must be known and stated. If you wish to call a specific individual, you must use that individual’s proper name in casting the spell.
The target creature is allowed a Will saving throw. If the saving throw succeeds, the creature resists the spell. If the saving
throw fails, the creature is immediately drawn to the trap (spell
resistance does not keep it from being called). The creature can
escape from the trap by successfully pitting its spell resistance
against your caster level check, by dimensional travel, or with a
successful Charisma check (DC 15 + 1/2 your caster level + your
Charisma modifier). It can try each method once per day. If it
breaks loose, it can flee or attack you. A dimensional anchor cast
on the creature prevents its escape via dimensional travel. You
can also employ a calling diagram (see magic circle against evil) to
make the trap more secure.
If the creature does not break free of the trap, you can keep
it bound for as long as you dare. You can attempt to compel the
creature to perform a service by describing the service and perhaps
offering some sort of reward. You make a Charisma check opposed
by the creature’s Charisma check. The check is assigned a bonus of
+0 to +6 based on the nature of the service and the reward. If the
creature wins the opposed check, it refuses service. New offers,
bribes, and the like can be made or the old ones reoffered every 24
hours. This process can be repeated until the creature promises
to serve, until it breaks free, or until you decide to get rid of it by
means of some other spell. Impossible demands or unreasonable
commands are never agreed to. If you ever roll a natural 1 on the
Charisma check, the creature breaks free of the spell’s effect and can
escape or attack you.
Once the requested service is completed, the creature need
only to inform you to be instantly sent back whence it came. The
creature might later seek revenge. If you assign some open-ended
task that the creature cannot complete through its own actions, the
spell remains in effect for a maximum of 1 day per caster level, and
the creature gains an immediate chance to break free (with the same
chance to resist as when it was trapped). Note that a clever recipient
can subvert some instructions.
When you use a calling spell to call an air, chaotic, earth, evil, fire,
good, lawful, or water creature, it is a spell of that type.
Bolding is mine but yes i can call the same angel and from the spell text no your right it doesn't say it breaks the dieties will and doesn't have to its assumed that spells funtion as written unless something else states it doesn't.
YES!!! You aren't creating a brand new temporary angel. Angels aren't siting at the planar police stations waiting for wizards to give the word. Like it or not, angels have lives, and when you cast Planar Binding you are interrupting somebodies day. Angels aren't civil servents. They aren't obligated to do anything for you. DO they fight evil? Hell yeah. On their terms, not yours. Casting Planar Binding isn't like calling the Ghost Busters!
Never thought you were creating anything. We have a difference of opinion on the angels that get summoned. I assume that the gods arrange it to suit themselves. I don't see it as a totally random lottery.
Superman: "Where am I? How did I get here? Damn you Lex, send me back!"Lex Luthor: "No. Your like a cop Superman, and that means you must do whatever I ask of you. If you want to be free again you need to do what I say now!"
Sounds like Luthor :) And if it involved a struggle against evil, would Superman just break out and fly away? Or would he deal with it and take it up with Lex later?
Bolding is mine but yes i can call the same angel and from the spell text no your right it doesn't say it breaks the dieties will and doesn't have to its assumed that spells funtion as written unless something else states it doesn't.
I know. I just happen to think you get the angels (or whatever) that handle these issues. Those names don't just leak out on their own. You're calling an angel who has a certain expertise in the issue (you don't call a clerk when you've got a burglary ongoing) or who you know and (presumably) trust to deal with it. So, yeah, if you know the name you get the correct angel.
Never thought you were creating anything. We have a difference of opinion on the angels that get summoned. I assume that the gods arrange it to suit themselves. I don't see it as a totally random lottery.
Several problems with this. First, Planar Binding isn't even a Divine spell except in the case of the Rune domain. That means that only gods with the Rune Domain grant this power. So no, gods don't have much say at all. Just ones who are card carrying members of "Rune".
Secondly, not all outsiders are even associated with gods. And you can also bind elementals with this spell which rarely have any connection to gods either.
Third, if you know the proper name of the creature you wish to bind, you can try to bind it. Gods don't even get to do anything about that.
Fourth, evil creatures can bind angels for nefarious purposes. If the angel's god doesn't prevent that, than the reason is either a.) that he has no ability to do so, or b.) The extent of his intervention with angels is exactly the same as the extent of his intervention with his Clerics: minimal.
Sounds like Luthor :) And if it involved a struggle against evil, would Superman just break out and fly away? Or would he deal with it and take it up with Lex later?
Three points here. One: Supes has refused to help Lex Luthor even when other metas had sided with him and by all accounts his cause was good and just...so yes, there is precedent for such a thing.
Two, what if Superman was out on important JLA business? What if while Superman is busy fighting Brainiac, with Wonder Woman, the Flash, Martian Manhunter, and the Batman, Lux Luthor decides he needs some favors done?
Three, who said that Lex Luthor would ever use this power for good?
Several problems with this. First, Planar Binding isn't even a Divine spell except in the case of the Rune domain. That means that only gods with the Rune Domain grant this power. So no, gods don't have much say at all. Just ones who are card carrying members of "Rune".
So, your mortal spellcaster is more powerful than a god. OK. Mine aren't. I didn't say they granted the spell btw. Just that it was well within the power of a god to say who answers the rather rude call and who does not.
Secondly, not all outsiders are even associated with gods. And you can also bind elementals with this spell which rarely have any connection to gods either.
True. There are elemental lords and powerful celestials (and fiends) who may not be gods but are certainly more powerful than a mortal spellcaster (well, most of them). That covers some, but others may be "unemployed". And, some may just get called. Guess they should have had an employer who could say "no". Or maybe they like free agency.
Third, if you know the proper name of the creature you wish to bind, you can try to bind it. Gods don't even get to do anything about that.
And you're going to call the celestial equivalent of an accountant? Somehow I suspect the ones who get called by name are capable of dealing with it. I also suspect that deities have a bit to do with the celebrity celestial list.
Fourth, evil creatures can bind angels for nefarious purposes. If the angel's god doesn't prevent that, than the reason is either a.) that he has no ability to do so, or b.) The extent of his intervention with angels is exactly the same as the extent of his intervention with his Clerics: minimal.
Or he expects his agent to do what he can. To spread the influence of good despite the mission. Or to just refuse until they can break out. A 911 call isn't always kosher. Ambushes happen. False alarms happen. I don't call the Clerics spells "minimal" btw. Your Cleric may want to do without them; mine doesn't.
Three points here. One: Supes has refused to help Lex Luthor even when other metas had sided with him and by all accounts his cause was good and just...so yes, there is precedent for such a thing.Two, what if Superman was out on important JLA business? What if while Superman is busy fighting Brainiac, with Wonder Woman, the Flash, Martian Manhunter, and the Batman, Lux Luthor decides he needs some favors done?
Three, who said that Lex Luthor would ever use this power for good?
Sorry, but I haven't kept up with Superman. If the cause isn't good, Superman just doesn't cooperate. He's been held temporarily in duress before iirc.
Good points btw, I find these type of discussions useful. They push you to think things through.
It's important to note that Planar Binding compels the bound entity to do it whether they want to or not. Horrible conditions on the terms (such as "Serve me loyally for a week and your reward is your freedom") impose penalties, but ultimately it comes down to an Opposed Charisma check. You can even hose your enemy down with spells to force them to submit, or even use charm monster to force them to agree.
I had a tiefling conjurer/malconvoker who broke a succubus this way. She proved she was the stronger and bound her to her will. It was a fairly slow but potent process of binding her into the circle, then using gaes on her to force her to do something she couldn't, slowly weakening the succubus. She cursed her (-4 to all checks), and cursed her (-6 charisma), and enhanced herself (Eagle's Splendor), and broke the succubus (-2 checks from Shaken), and basically seemed like the scariest damn thing you'd ever seen. She forced the succubus to tell her her name, and at that point she was pretty much hers forever.
The Malconvoker was LN leaning towards Evil early in the campaign due to her life conditions, but by the end of the campaign was more LG than LN and had actually managed to redeem the succubus into a Neutral creature with the Evil subtype.
But she could have just as easily forced an angel to go and slaughter a village, as she could have forced the succubus to do benevolent things to atone for her crimes. Personally, I think that using angels to commit horrible evils is exactly the kind of monster you want to stop, and would make a great BBEG.
I mean, when you come across the guy doing all the murdering, and you find it's a trapped angel being magically compelled to do these horrible things against its will (likely upsetting the saintly being horribly) you realize that you need to release the angel somehow, and may not wish to kill it (it's not summoned, it's called, so it could die). At this point, the Paladin in the party knows just what kind of terrible monster they're dealing with, and thinks about how lovingly he's going to deliver that smite when he sees him, while drawing his merciful weapon to deal with the bound angel.
It would even make for an incredibly intense fight, where the party has to fight a sobbing angel who begs for them to kill him/her to prevent further evils at his/her hands - further demonstrating the sacrificial love that the angel has for the very victims that it is forced to hurt.
Yes...now that is a BBEG.
So, your mortal spellcaster is more powerful than a god. OK. Mine aren't. I didn't say they granted the spell btw. Just that it was well within the power of a god to say who answers the rather rude call and who does not.
No, not directly. But gods are hardly omniscient or omnipotent in D&D. Never have been. Gods actually play by the rules too. They might be uber high level, but they still cast the same spells, use the same feats, and interact with the game in the same way you do. They have never had the power to deny a wizard his spell effects unless either a.) the spells specifically states that the gods can do this, or b.) The god actively tries to do something about it.
Its no doubt who would win that fight, but gods must still actual "use" their powers to do anything. He isn't Yahweh, he doesn't have the whole "MY WILL BE DONE!" power. I don't see how they could possibly play Binding Event Organizer all the time.
True. There are elemental lords and powerful celestials (and fiends) who may not be gods but are certainly more powerful than a mortal spellcaster (well, most of them). That covers some, but others may be "unemployed". And, some may just get called. Guess they should have had an employer who could say "no". Or maybe they like free agency.
Yes, they will be more powerful. That doesn't mean they can will your spells to work differently. That isn't how the game works.
And you're going to call the celestial equivalent of an accountant? Somehow I suspect the ones who get called by name are capable of dealing with it. I also suspect that deities have a bit to do with the celebrity celestial list.
I didn't say that. But even if every angel you ever call is a battle hardened veteran of evil killin', he still isn't at your beck and call. He still isn't yours to command. Oh wait! Yes he is. That's what the spell does :P
The ones who get called by name are capable of dealing with it in the same manner as the ones who were not called by name: By using the methods specified in the spell itself, starting with a Will save. They don't get to do anything outside of those things, because that's how the spell works.
Or he expects his agent to do what he can. To spread the influence of good despite the mission. Or to just refuse until they can break out. A 911 call isn't always kosher. Ambushes happen. False alarms happen.
With Planar Binding, Angels can be made to do the following...
fight a demon, do your laundry, have sex with you, kill infants, heal the wounded, sing for the queen, paint your house, mine for mithril, get married, make an everburning torch, take you to mount Celestia, cause an earthquake, regrow your severed arm.
I doubt any of this is in the angel training manual. It isn't in the job description.
I don't call the Clerics spells "minimal" btw. Your Cleric may want to do without them; mine doesn't.
Yes, gods grant people spells in return for a certain behavior. But that is extremely minimal when you think about what they COULD be doing. If a cleric of Pelor dies, for example, Pelor doesn't bring you back to life. He has granted someone else the power to do so, but he hasn't bothered to inform that person on your behalf. Your friends will have to do that for him. In fact, Pelor doesn't even love his followers enough to give them a discount on the raise dead costs.
Gods in D&D are basically just lazy egomaniacs.
Sorry, but I haven't kept up with Superman. If the cause isn't good, Superman just doesn't cooperate. He's been held temporarily in duress before iirc.Good points btw, I find these type of discussions useful. They push you to think things through.
Agreed
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Why am i now picturing Temple of Pelor insurance policies. Complete with a contingency spell to teleport your corpse instantly upon death to a specified cleric for your paid for spell.
No, not directly. But gods are hardly omniscient or omnipotent in D&D. Never have been. Gods actually play by the rules too. They might be uber high level, but they still cast the same spells, use the same feats, and interact with the game in the same way you do. They have never had the power to deny a wizard his spell effects unless either a.) the spells specifically states that the gods can do this, or b.) The god actively tries to do something about it.
Agreed on the omnisiency / omnipotence. Not that I'd tell them that in person :) To an extent, they make the rules, so yeah, they play by them. During the description of divine turf in 3.5 (was it 3.5 or 3.0?) -- the Manual of the Planes -- they did have total power iirc, at least over their home plane. They could reshape their realm, alter laws, control access etc. PF hasn't defined that yet. It hasn't defined post 20th level play yet either, but there isn't any doubt that gods are well beyond that.
Its no doubt who would win that fight, but gods must still actual "use" their powers to do anything. He isn't Yahweh, he doesn't have the whole "MY WILL BE DONE!" power. I don't see how they could possibly play Binding Event Organizer all the time.
I'd guess they have flunkies to help. Those saints and demigods have to earn their keep somehow. And, even if not omniscient they still are vastly beyong any mortal.
Yes, they will be more powerful. That doesn't mean they can will your spells to work differently. That isn't how the game works.
That we know of. One of the fun things about this is that it's undefined by the game. One day Paizo may define it, until then we're all engaging in a bit of speculation. Who knows, when you knock on their planar door you may get automatically counterspelled.
I didn't say that. But even if every angel you ever call is a battle hardened veteran of evil killin', he still isn't at your beck and call. He still isn't yours to command. Oh wait! Yes he is. That's what the spell does :P
No, he's not. You can bribe or beg but their is one important line in the spell (Planar Binding) that you're missing:
"Impossible demands or unreasonable commands are never agreed to."
This is in the bottom of the third paragraph down under Charisma checks. It doesn't say anything trumps this. It gives the method for getting them to agree (Charisma checks) and then states this afterwards. Unreasonable would, imo, include doing things against their alignment, making suicide attacks, etc. Double check me on this, but it seems to lock out some demands.
The ones who get called by name are capable of dealing with. In the same manner as the ones who were not called by name. By using the methods specified in the spell itself, starting with a Will save. They don't get to do anything outside of those things, because that's how the spell works
See the above "Impossible demands or unreasonable commands" bit.
With Planar Binding, Angels can be made to do the following...fight a demon, do your laundry, have sex with you, kill infants, heal the wounded, sing for the queen, paint your house, mine for mithril, get married, make an everburning torch, take you to mount Celestia, cause an earthquake, regrow your severed arm.
I doubt any of this is in the angel training manual. It isn't in the job description.
Apparently it doesn't need to be. Given the right magic / time you might circumvent this refusal to cooperate. And you might draw the negative attention of a lot of other beings who wouldn't like the implications. Could get ugly.
Yes, gods grant people spells in return for a certain behavior. But that is extremely minimal when you think about what they COULD be doing. If a cleric of Pelor dies, for example, Pelor doesn't bring you back to life. He has granted someone else the power to do so, but he hasn't bothered to inform that person on your behalf. Your friends will have to do that for him. In fact, Pelor doesn't even love his followers enough to give them a discount on the raise dead costs.Gods in D&D are basically just lazy egomaniacs.
Gods delegate I guess. They aren't omniscient, as you pointed out, so they use agents. Demigods, saints, celestials, fiends, elementals, Clerics, Oracles, Adepts -- the list goes on. And yes, they are egomaniacs. The lazy bit is optional :D
I'd guess they have flunkies to help. Those saints and demigods have to earn their keep somehow. And, even if not omniscient they still are vastly beyong any mortal.
Without omniscience or interplanar spy networks monitoring the action of every wizard powerful enough to cast a calling spell how could they ever possibly influence your spells at all? How would they even know?
That we know of. One of the fun things about this is that it's undefined by the game. One day Paizo may define it, until then we're all engaging in a bit of speculation. Who knows, when you knock on their planar door you may get automatically counterspelled.
Well if they do decide to define what gods look like I hope to all things sane that they don't do something dumb like make them level 40, 50, and 60 like 3.x did. If balors are CR 20s than demigods need to be CR 16 to 24s at the most.
No, he's not. You can bribe or beg but their is one important line in the spell (Planar Binding) that you're missing:"Impossible demands or unreasonable commands are never agreed to."
I didn't miss it. That was more of a joke. However, when the game mentions "Impossible demands" this is clear and easy to understand. But "unreasonable commands" is too vague to care about. It doesn't mean anything unless we defined unreasonable. Currently it means the same things as "make up something yourself."
This is in the bottom of the third paragraph down under Charisma checks. It doesn't say anything trumps this. It gives the method for getting them to agree (Charisma checks) and then states this afterwards. Unreasonable would, imo, include doing things against their alignment, making suicide attacks, etc. Double check me on this, but it seems to lock out some demands.
It does. But its just setting you up for arguments at the table. What is and is not considered unreasonable is going to have to much variance from person to person. Its lazy writing.
Apparently it doesn't need to be. Given the right magic / time you might circumvent this refusal to cooperate. And you might draw the negative attention of a lot of other beings who wouldn't like the implications. Could get ugly.
They could get ugly, you're right. But it says so in the spell. They are allowed to come and seek revenge upon you (if they are good aligned they will call it justice). They could even bring some friends. But it doesn't say that gods can prevent or modify the spell. Speculation on what might be written about in a book that doesn't exist doesn't change what is.
Gods delegate I guess. They aren't omniscient, as you pointed out, so they use agents. Demigods, saints, celestials, fiends, elementals, Clerics, Oracles, Adepts -- the list goes on. And yes, they are egomaniacs. The lazy bit is optional :D
As an aside, I always imagin the behavior of D&D gods as written to be a little like this...
Pelor: "I love myself. I love myself a lot. Cleric, if you worship me, praise me, love me, and behave in a vaguely similar manner (alignment) as me I will grant you power so that you may sing my praises to the people and increase my influence in the world. I love me.
Angel: "My lord one of your most faithful followers has perished in battle during a quest in your name."
Pelor: "So what do you want me to do about it? Let one of the clerics deal with it that's what they are their for!...did you know that the sun shines specifically for me? I'm so good."
Angel: *sigh*
Pelor is like the celestial version of Vapp Brannigan.
Well if they do decide to define what gods look like I hope to all things sane that they don't do something dumb like make them level 40, 50, and 60 like 3.x did. If balors are CR 20s than demigods need to be CR 16 to 24s at the most.
CR 16 is not demigod status. A demigod should at least be as high in power as a Lord of the Nine or an Duke of Hell. A typical horned devil should not be going toe to toe with a deity.
You can't be bossing angels around when you are nothing more than a glorified mortal.
CR 16 is not demigod status. A demigod should at least be as high in power as a Lord of the Nine or an Duke of Hell. A typical horned devil should not be going toe to toe with a deity. You can't be bossing angels around when you are nothing more than a glorified mortal.
Glorified mortals is what demigods in mythology are. Heracles, Cu Chulain, Ansel, Gilgamesh, Achilles, Perseus, etc...they weren't even CR 16s. Perseus' biggest claim to fame was killing a CR 7 monster.
At CR 16 you are on par with Ancient Black Dragons. At 17 you are on par with Rune Giants. Demigods who can take on ancients dragons without fear or wrestle the giants and win because of your god like strength...yeah that looks about right to me.
As a CR 16 you can wipe out large groups of bebiliths, rakshasas, fire giants, vampires, and t-rexs. When fire giants are weak mooks you are a demi-god.
Just my opinion, sure, but I think that the game needs a hard cap of 30. At that point you are a greater deity and as powerful as it is possible to become. Anyway, I don't wanna go on a tangent about it so I'll stop there :)
CR 16 is not demigod status. A demigod should at least be as high in power as a Lord of the Nine or an Duke of Hell. A typical horned devil should not be going toe to toe with a deity. You can't be bossing angels around when you are nothing more than a glorified mortal.Glorified mortals is what demigods in mythology are. Heracles, Cu Chulain, Ansel, Gilgamesh, Achilles, Perseus, etc...they weren't even CR 16s. Perseus' biggest claim to fame was killing a CR 7 monster.
At CR 16 you are on par with Ancient Black Dragons. At 17 you are on par with Rune Giants. Demigods who can take on ancients dragons without fear or wrestle the giants and win because of your god like strength...yeah that looks about right to me.
As a CR 16 you can wipe out large groups of bebiliths, rakshasas, fire giants, vampires, and t-rexs. When fire giants are weak mooks you are a demi-god.
Just my opinion, sure, but I think that the game needs a hard cap of 30. At that point you are a greater deity and as powerful as it is possible to become. Anyway, I don't wanna go on a tangent about it so I'll stop there :)
The monsters don't match the book CR's so that comparison does not work. As an example most dragons in movies don't equate to the game's dragons.
The game's demigods get access to many magical abilities, while not all demigods did.If you compare WoTC's Hercules he was a lot stronger than the the literature based one. Now if you want to use the literature to set CR's instead of 3.5 precedents the game probably caps at CR 12 before you start to account for the deities.
|
Why am i now picturing Temple of Pelor insurance policies. Complete with a contingency spell to teleport your corpse instantly upon death to a specified cleric for your paid for spell.
Food for thought: The adventurer's guild in the city for the banewarrens campaign (forget the name) has this. You can prepay for resurrections and even prepay to have someone go fetch your corpse. the contingency setup is much more expensive, but you can get that too.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
On the subject of the demigod thing, I gotta agree with WPharolin. Frankly normal characters are godlike by the time they reach the high teens. In core 3.5 (SRD), by the time a wizard is level 17 (CR 16-17) they can replicate every miracle of the Holy Bible, including the creation of an every-expanding universe which they control, immortality, creating all life in their plane, parting oceans, raising the dead, knocking down walls, preventing their followers from being consumed by fire, consuming stuff by fire, exorcising demons, commanding demons, and so on and so forth. Frankly the deities and demigods stuff was kinda dumb.
Even in Pathfinder where wizards got issued nerf bats compared to their 3.5 counterparts, they are still capable of easily doing everything on that list short of perhaps creating their ever-expanding universe, and parting the ocean (though Paizo recently released a spell to create your own plane, though I don't know much about it so I'm not going to speak of it beyond this). Otherwise wizards can indeed replicate "GOD" in even the most impressive ways (the making all life and people from dirt part is probably my favorite though).
Heck, by the time you're level 11, even a warrior class with no spellcasting ability would be seen as a demigod by most real-world cultures. This is a guy that would have songs and legends written about them. I mean, an 11th level Fighter can tear through a brick wall using nothing more than a stick he picks up off the ground because he's just that unbelievable. Don't believe me?
The average stone wall has hardness 8 and 15 hp per inch of thickness, so if we have a wall of solid stone six inches thick (hardness 8, 90 hp) the 11th level Fighter can pick up a stick off the ground, approach the wall, and full-attack it with the stick while wielding it 2 handed. The result likely looks about like this.
3.5 (weapon) + 9 (1.5 strength) + 9 (power attack) - 8 (hardness) = 13.5 damage per swing, and he hits 3 times during his full-attack, resulting in an average of 40.5 damage per round against the 6 inch solid stone slab. It will take him only about 12 seconds to tear out a 5ft section of the wall using a stick he found on the ground.
That's without even accounting for magical enhancements, buff spells, or special materials like adamantine weaponry, or just simply a better weapon than a 0 gp club or staff.
Honestly, by 20th level you are god-like. I don't think you need to be 60th level to qualify.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
This one time:
We were in a dungeon. I'm playing the wizard. Half the party dies, first one down is the cleric. everyone but me is in their bleed, or dead. Enemy advancing toward me. Luckily, no teleporters. I cast wall of stone. We're walled in, but it buys me some time.. the GM at this point is expecting a tpk, and has a bit of a "whoops" expression on his face about how badly combat went.
I say: "I cast planar binding"
"Ah, you're going to summon something that can heal!" Says the GM.
Me: "I summon bob the cleric."
GM: "But Bob is a human, not an outsider. That doesn't work."
Me: "Yes it does, he's now a native of his deity's domain (this is how FR works at least), though he may still be waiting to be collected by his deity's followers, either way he's now a good aligned outsider."
GM: "Fair enough"
Bob shows up, bound in the circle.
Bob: "What's going on? I thought I was dead!"
I point at his corpse.
Bob: "S$!&! what did you do!"
Me: "Planar Binding. Now you're going to heal the group and stop them from dying, then you're going to resurrect yourself. In exchange you get your freedom."
Bob: "uhhhh.... okay?"
You mad genius! All my bases are belong to you! :D
Why thank you!
This one time:
We were in a dungeon. I'm playing the wizard. Half the party dies, first one down is the cleric. everyone but me is in their bleed, or dead. Enemy advancing toward me. Luckily, no teleporters. I cast wall of stone. We're walled in, but it buys me some time.. the GM at this point is expecting a tpk, and has a bit of a "whoops" expression on his face about how badly combat went.
I say: "I cast planar binding"
"Ah, you're going to summon something that can heal!" Says the GM.
Me: "I summon bob the cleric."
GM: "But Bob is a human, not an outsider. That doesn't work."
Me: "Yes it does, he's now a native of his deity's domain (this is how FR works at least), though he may still be waiting to be collected by his deity's followers, either way he's now a good aligned outsider."
GM: "Fair enough"
Bob shows up, bound in the circle.
Bob: "What's going on? I thought I was dead!"
I point at his corpse.
Bob: "S!$@! what did you do!"
Me: "Planar Binding. Now you're going to heal the group and stop them from dying, then you're going to resurrect yourself. In exchange you get your freedom."
Bob: "uhhhh.... okay?"
You mad genius! All my bases are belong to you! :D
EDIT: Something weird is going on with the board editing, methinks. ^.^"
|
|
I agree completely, that is why I prefer an allegiance system, in which characters are loyal to the things they value most (which could be good and law, or their conception of it).
For some reason, this thread makes me think of Miko Miyazaki from OoTS. Now there was an awful good paladin!
Hmm. Can you explain/link to this allegiance system? It sounds quite interesting.
I dropped the alignment from my D&D like 2 years ago. I found a quick and easy guide someone on the internet came up with that removes alignment from spells, keeps paladins, but gives them smite instead of smite evil, etc.
They still fight evil things and people talk about evil, but now its all based on characters judgment calls instead of a weird mix of absolute good and evil and subjective good and evil which sometimes dont make much sense.
|
|
EDIT: Something weird is going on with the board editing, methinks. ^.^"
Yep. clearly. lol. you quoted me, and the quote showed up before my post somehow, so I went to move my post, then your post was gone, etc. was a funny 5 minutes. eventually I gave up.
Once I was playing in a game and I was summoned randomly by a wizard on another plane with planar binding, because he knew my truename somehow (He was in Sigil, I was in a material plane therefore I counted as an outsider). He ordered me around for a bit, I got killed, and I reappeared back in my chair at the pub where everyone was freaking out wondering where I went.
Anyways: I accidentally an all nighter again. I'm off to bed. lol.
I don't really see a problem with planar binding, sure you trap an outsider, summoning him into your presence. You quickly appoligize to the Archon and tell him you need his help badly in your personal struggle against evil. Now the Archon can decline or be angry, you appoligize again and tell the Archon you will send him back if he doesn't agree to help.
So yea, basically you are making a plea for help, the outsider that comes can decline or accept after you made your case. It is not much different than asking a noble to help rid the land of bandits. It is not evil to inconvenience a good outsider for a short while to make your plea, but probably not something you want to make a habbit unless circumstances are dire
I don't really see a problem with planar binding, sure you trap an outsider, summoning him into your presence. You quickly appoligize to the Archon and tell him you need his help badly in your personal struggle against evil. Now the Archon can decline or be angry, you appoligize again and tell the Archon you will send him back if he doesn't agree to help.
So yea, basically you are making a plea for help, the outsider that comes can decline or accept after you made your case. It is not much different than asking a noble to help rid the land of bandits. It is not evil to inconvenience a good outsider for a short while to make your plea, but probably not something you want to make a habbit unless circumstances are dire
On the subject of Planar Binding and it's "enslavement", I too do not see it as an automatic thing (but I've stayed out of the planar binding discussion for the most part until now). Planar binding can be a means to facilitate a meeting. You technically don't even have to use a magic circle if you're exceptionally confident they won't pose some sort of threat. I'd still use a magic circle on the off-chance you accidentally grab a fallen angel or something (since most intelligent beings would understand your concern).
I've had a number of times where my wizards used Planar Binding and didn't even bother to attempt a forced charisma check to make the entity do something. Merely Diplomacy. While an evil guy might happily enslave a genie to grant him wishes, you can pull an Aladdin and find a genie who wants to grant you some wishes for a wish on his behalf. That's a great example of why a spellcaster might want to be polite to their called guest.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
But I'm a bit curious. Why would a Neutral wizard become evil for using summoned fiends to do good? I mean, the entire basis of the understanding of the balance between good and evil in Pathfinder hinges on the idea that doing evil to evil things is somehow justifiable, and thus not an evil action. Otherwise a Paladin would fall for slaying a bandit because killing is evil, but because he's killing for good then it somehow makes it okay.My question would be: Why is that neutral wizard summoning fiends in the first place? Why not aeons or elementals or psychopomps? And for that matter, why is a neutral wizard trying to do good in the first place? He's not really neutral if:
1) He's working with fiends and letting them spread their influence (even if that means nothing more than being visible).
2) He's trying to do good deeds.
The argument is fundamentally flawed, as far as I can tell.
That's why at my table, I have begged the whole issue of spell alignment effects on character alignment. A spell is just a tool. Intention, action, and results are what count.
If a wizard summoned a devil and managed to make its use achieve a 'good' result, he would be fine. It behooves me as a GM to make the summoning of an evil outsider by a good character feel risky. Have a devil easily twist their orders, use abilities that may injure bystanders, etc... That way, an evil summoning is not inherently alignment changing. But the unintended side effects could induce such change. Especially if a character continued to have good intentions but shrug off the less than stellar side effects/results.
See I think the problem now, is that there are some logical inconsistencies between how evil descriptor spells and good descriptor spells are seen to influence alignment. If a spell is evil because of its descriptor, no matter what use its put too, the converse must be true as well. But that opens up summoning angels to slaughter orphans for fun as a good act.
To avoid this entire issue, the only thing that effects alignment in my games is character actions. I won't let them hide behind the shield of "but it was a good spell!" if they do wrong, and I won't penalize them for casting a naughty spell if the intentions AND results are good. You'd be surprised at how thoughtful this can make players about their own actions. Rather than worrying about 'will my alignment change if i cast this?' its 'what tools can I use to achieve the most good, and what are the risks of using this tool'.
A character's alignment is a reflective attribute that doesn't define behavior. GMs should encourage players to play their characters the way they would act regardless of alignment. All alignment should accomplish is a quick and easy simulationist way to judge the summation of the character's actions in terms of the black and white law/chaos and evil/good axes and weighted in terms of significance. It's all subjective.
Usually it doesn't matter if a single action is evil/good/chaotic/lawful or not. A single good/evil/chaotic/lawful action wouldn't typically change your alignment unless one or both of the following were true:
* The action was one of many similar actions or many aligned actions of similar significance.
* The action was so significant that it completely overrides many previous actions of a different alignment.
Sometimes it does matter whether or not a single action is aligned. Usually this is in terms of the paladin's code of conduct or cleric's spell restrictions, but occasionally the issue pops up.
If a character acts otherwise neutral but constantly and continuously creates undead or summons devils, it's considerable that those individual actions are all evil. They may or may not have much significance -- summoning a devil to slaughter an innocent person is different than slaughtering a warband of marauding trolls -- but still the actions more or less weigh against a neutral alignment toward evil. If a significant evil action is committed by our devil summoner, it's much easier to justify his shift to an evil alignment.
So really, the argument about casting a spell with descriptor X meaning the action is aligned with alignment X is much ado about nothing the vast majority of the time. Usually the only time it's a problem is when a GM improperly applies alignment or improperly judges the significance of an aligned action.
Except that the Core Rule Book explains that alignment is a guide for roleplaying.
How is this incompatible with:
A character's alignment is a reflective attribute that doesn't define behavior.
A guide is different than a straitjacket.
So if I make my own game, and I tell you ____ was my intent, even though I did not write it clearly I think it is pretty easy to assume that my intent was the intent.
And when what you wrote goes diametrically opposed to what you are saying is your intent I'll tell you that you really should go back and rewrite things. And personally I'll believe that either you are lying, have changed your mind, or don't really know what's going on.
I don't how much power James has to just go back and say "fix it", but assuming he/I can't, and you know this do you go with the book or what I said. I don't think that is worth lying about unless you can come up with a reason to lie about it.
PS:I think Paizo has other reasons for not changing it, but that does not change the fact that the words don't match intent. So at this point do you go with the book or what the creator said?
On the subject of the demigod thing, I gotta agree with WPharolin. Frankly normal characters are godlike by the time they reach the high teens. In core 3.5 (SRD), by the time a wizard is level 17 (CR 16-17) they can replicate every miracle of the Holy Bible, including the creation of an every-expanding universe which they control, immortality, creating all life in their plane, parting oceans, raising the dead, knocking down walls, preventing their followers from being consumed by fire, consuming stuff by fire, exorcising demons, commanding demons, and so on and so forth. Frankly the deities and demigods stuff was kinda dumb.
Even in Pathfinder where wizards got issued nerf bats compared to their 3.5 counterparts, they are still capable of easily doing everything on that list short of perhaps creating their ever-expanding universe, and parting the ocean (though Paizo recently released a spell to create your own plane, though I don't know much about it so I'm not going to speak of it beyond this). Otherwise wizards can indeed replicate "GOD" in even the most impressive ways (the making all life and people from dirt part is probably my favorite though).
Heck, by the time you're level 11, even a warrior class with no spellcasting ability would be seen as a demigod by most real-world cultures. This is a guy that would have songs and legends written about them. I mean, an 11th level Fighter can tear through a brick wall using nothing more than a stick he picks up off the ground because he's just that unbelievable. Don't believe me?
The average stone wall has hardness 8 and 15 hp per inch of thickness, so if we have a wall of solid stone six inches thick (hardness 8, 90 hp) the 11th level Fighter can pick up a stick off the ground, approach the wall, and full-attack it with the stick while wielding it 2 handed. The result likely looks about like this.
3.5 (weapon) + 9 (1.5 strength) + 9 (power attack) - 8 (hardness) = 13.5 damage per swing, and he hits 3 times during his full-attack, resulting in an average...
That does not make you a demigod, not by 3.5 standards anyway. The human in fantasy land don't care for out piddly limitation. I am going by fantasy land standards. Most poster will agree that the best of us in a generation probably don't get past level 7. Fanatasy land has level 7's as mayors, and bodyguards instead of presidents, and elite commandors(such as the guy the created the Navy Seals). I am not saying he was level 7, but in Fantasy land he probably would not have the influence he does here.
Now if you want to use our world as the standard the game can probably cap at level 10 or 11.
In short I guess it depends on which world you want to go by.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
That does not make you a demigod, not by 3.5 standards anyway. The human in fantasy land don't care for out piddly limitation. I am going by fantasy land standards. Most poster will agree that the best of us in a generation probably don't get past level 7. Fanatasy land has level 7's as mayors, and bodyguards instead of presidents, and elite commandors(such as the guy the created the Navy Seals). I am not saying he was level 7, but in Fantasy land he probably would not have the influence he does here.
Now if you want to use our world as the standard the game can probably cap at level 10 or 11.
In short I guess it depends on which world you want to go by.
The game assumes real world standards plus high fantasy. In 3.x the game assumed that people above level 1 were progressively rare, with PC-classed characters being a rare subset of those, and so forth. The majority of the world is assumed to be low-level and within the relative range of realism. It is entirely the GM's choice to have 7th level characters as mayors and such, and that's fine. However if they are 7th level mayors and bodyguards they are more likely to be NPC classed, which means their overall CR is actually far lower than their level comparatively in power (the MM/Bestiary suggests that every 2 NPC levels is +1 to CR). Following the Bestiary rules, a 7th level Warrior Bodyguard is CR 2 (+6 levels of warrior adds +3 CR, and a level 1 warrior is CR 1/3, so you go CR 1/3->1/2->1->2).
You can ignore the real-world standard, but everything in the core rules assumes it. The only thing I've seen that doesn't support it is Gamemastery Guide's premade NPCs, but they're kinda silly (they seem to think that your average barmaid is a higher CR than your typical orc raider).
Gods are fantastic. Believe in them or not in real life, mythologies of gods, monsters, and spirits are the driving force behind fantasy stories and games. If doing stuff like creating worlds, life, being immortal, parting oceans, and so forth doesn't qualify on the godlike scale, then I'm not sure what does. Or does it take having over the top abilities to which you have no defense against and 60+ Hit Dice to qualify you for the title of "godlike"?
EDIT: I'll put it another way. If everyone is in fact a super human by all reasonable conditions, then it makes the PCs far less fantastic, and actually very underwhelming. It doesn't really matter if you're a 1st level Fighter because the Innkeeper is probably a CR 5 fighter 1/expert 3/adept 2 and could easily have stopped all the CR 1/3 orcs rampaging through the valley using nothing more than his steely glare and his frying pan if he wanted to. Assuming of course he didn't let his minion the waitress slaughter them with her kitchen knife and throwing platter and blinding drinks.
So either a high level character is special and quickly approaching godlike, or you're just resetting the scale and weakening everything around humans (and I do mean everything, since stuff like hardness and hit points in objects is reflected here as well), and setting a lower bar than average for everyone and pushing the high bar farther away.
"Well the mayor of this tiny hamlet is a 7th level character, and the blacksmith is 5th. You guys are all 1st level, so you need to go risk life and limb and kill countless orcs to be as good as a paper pusher and a horseshoe maker. One day you might reach 11th level and be like a competent bodyguard. If the campaign goes on for a long time, you might hit level 70 and be godlike."
I'm sorry, I'm not following you. If you read whole post I think you'll find that I agree with you.
I did read your post and generally did pretty much agree with it -- it's just that one point I was commenting on (:
That does not make you a demigod, not by 3.5 standards anyway. The human in fantasy land don't care for out piddly limitation. I am going by fantasy land standards. Most poster will agree that the best of us in a generation probably don't get past level 7. Fanatasy land has level 7's as mayors, and bodyguards instead of presidents, and elite commandors(such as the guy the created the Navy Seals). I am not saying he was level 7, but in Fantasy land he probably would not have the influence he does here.
Now if you want to use our world as the standard the game can probably cap at level 10 or 11.
In short I guess it depends on which world you want to go by.
The game assumes real world standards plus high fantasy. In 3.x the game assumed that people above level 1 were progressively rare, with PC-classed characters being a rare subset of those, and so forth. The majority of the world is assumed to be low-level and within the relative range of realism. It is entirely the GM's choice to have 7th level characters as mayors and such, and that's fine. However if they are 7th level mayors and bodyguards they are more likely to be NPC classed, which means their overall CR is actually far lower than their level comparatively in power (the MM/Bestiary suggests that every 2 NPC levels is +1 to CR). Following the Bestiary rules, a 7th level Warrior Bodyguard is CR 2 (+6 levels of warrior adds +3 CR, and a level 1 warrior is CR 1/3, so you go CR 1/3->1/2->1->2).
You can ignore the real-world standard, but everything in the core rules assumes it. The only thing I've seen that doesn't support it is Gamemastery Guide's premade NPCs, but they're kinda silly (they seem to think that your average barmaid is a higher CR than your typical orc raider).
Gods are fantastic. Believe in them or not in real life, mythologies of gods, monsters, and spirits are the driving force behind fantasy stories and games. If doing stuff like creating worlds, life, being immortal, parting oceans, and so forth...
I don't consider Horned Devils to be demigod status. Titans(CR 22 or 23) maybe, but in mythology they were able to take on a deity. You have to be pushing CR/Level 22. Pit Fiends are CR 20, and there are quiet a few of them and even more Balors. It is not just about what you can do, but how you compare to other things in your world. A level 11 wizard can turn people to stone. Clerics of that level bring people back from the dead so in our world somewhere around level 11 would qualify, but for the game I think you have to go much higher since the power scale is different. You can be level 11 in fantasy land, and be someone's lackey, and not even the right hand man.
In the game, going off of 3.5 since PF has no such rules, you have to at least have a divine rank of 0 or either 1 to be a demigod. That still put you above pit fiends(not modified).
So I am going to have to disagree that with "...everything in the core rules assumes it...".
Our world is low magic at it's highest and doing those miracles is not as rare in fantasy land so you don't get as many points for doing them there.
Example:You throw a fireball in fantasyland and you get a lot less attention for the same display here. You can also fly at level 5. That alone would probably get you a few worshippers if you can convince them you are the incarnation of some deity.
In short what determines who/what I put on demigod status determines what world I am in. An example is the fact that the worth of an athlete is considered to be relative. You might get high ratings in college(our world), but get bounced out of the pros(fantasy land).
edit(to respond to your edit):I don't the average bartender is above CR 1, nor could the average blacksmith defeat a squad of orcs, but the fact that a CR 7 has vastly more pull in our world than fantasyland says a lot. Even a special forces soldier probably gets no higher than a 5, and most of them are probably level 3. Level 3 characters are not that hard to get a hold of. Female soldiers in a certain AP are about a CR 3 so that supports that claim.
As to the Hercules claim made by WP, Hercules in the books is not even a demigod by fantasyland standards. The boost they(3.5) gave him is pretty high. I think I mentioned it before, but it needed to be mentioned again.
That also supports the difference in expectations. Literature based Hercules probably is no higher than level 13.
The scale doesn't change. The bar is merely raised. The difference is not in power but in how much power mortals can achieve. In short, we are playing a game where people can achieve godlike power (even Golarion basically has ascended humans as gods). There are indeed lots of pit Fiends and Balors, but then there are the uberlords of fiendish kinds.
Even more terrible than the typical balor are those who do not call a demon lord their master, but instead are masters themselves. A balor lord typically rules over a region no larger than half the size of the realm in which it resides (as only full demon lords can command the rule of an entire Abyssal realm), and even though most balor lords rule much smaller regions (generally areas comparable in size to a single continent), their power is vast indeed.
A balor lord is typically a CR 21 to CR 25 monster (a range shared with the various unique nascent demon lords, with the range of CR 26 and above being the domain of the demon lords themselves), and as such serves quite well as the final villain in a long-running campaign. The majority of balor lords have several levels of barbarian, fighter, or ranger (although ranger balor lords never form bonds with animals), but some instead have levels of bard, rogue, sorcerer, or wizard. Cleric balor lords are unknown, as they see themselves as objects of worship, not the other way around, although rumors persist of powerful balor clerics that directly serve demon lords or even evil gods.
Rulers of infernal realms, generals of Hell's armies, and advisors to the archfiends, pit fiends embody the awesome and terrible pinnacle of devilkind. Massive, physically indomitable, and possessed of ingenious evil intellects, these diabolical tyrants hold great autonomy whether in their service to the archfiends, in their rule of vast infernal fiefdoms, or in subjugation of mortal worlds. Thick muscles cling to their gigantic frames, armored over by dense, bladed scales capable of deflecting all but the most potent assaults. Fangs as thick as daggers fill their maws, bestial visages disguising some of the most insidious minds in Hell. Born within the depths of Nessus, the ninth and deepest layer of Hell, pit fiends are raised from the ranks of cornugons and gelugons by the archdevils and their dukes alone. While many travel to higher layers and far from Hell to command infernal legions, most remain in Nessus serving in the courts of Hell's elite or in dark councils with unknowable purposes. Pit fiends always stand over 14 feet tall, with wingspans in excess of 20 feet and weights over 1,000 pounds.
Infernal Dukes
The most powerful of pit fiends are lords in their own right—members of the elite caste of infernal politics and leadership known as the Dukes of Hell. While not all of the Dukes of Hell are pit fiends, the majority of them are. As a general rule, a pit fiend Duke of Hell has several levels of a particular character class, the advanced simple template, or in some cases unusual spell-like abilities or unique powers over and above those of most pit fiends. Listed here are three sample unique pit fiend duke abilities, but these examples are by no means the entirety of what strange powers an infernal duke might wield.
Judging by these notations, Balors are actually pretty darn close to what one would consider gods. At the very least, they command enough power to completely dominate continent sized regions in the abyssal planes, where creatures capable of decimating mortal powers by themselves; the weakest of these subjects being Dretch and Quasit, both of which are equivalent to 4 trained warriors in the mortal realm). In short, their commoners are stronger than four of our trained warriors (equivalent to about 4.44 trained warriors, actually).
Even the "Demon Lords" who have no stats given are noted to be around CR 26. Isn't Asmodeus somewhere around that kind of power?
It is not that the scale is different. 3E D&D scales from "realism to superman is a wimp". You are going to get verisimilitude breaking results if you assume humans are even somewhere close to the middle range of that, rather than at the bottom with the rest of mortals. As far as mortals are concerned, Solars are effectively gods. Of course, to Ghaels, Solars are merely "really powerful", and to Balor Lords they are interesting opponents. To Demon Lords they have little chance.
EDIT: Or in short, it's not that the scale is actually different from real life. It's just that there are bigger fish in D&D. Sure demigods could theoretically kill gods. A normal mortal has no chance. If a god is CR 23, then a party of 20th level PCs can likely destroy them with no problems. If a typical mortal (a CR 1/4 commoner or CR 1/3 warrior) tried to do so, they'd be vaporized the moment they drew their sword.