|
By what logic? the tie between a Paladin's Lay on Hands and the Paladin's Channel Positive energy is in the class description, it's not just something that we pulled out of the ether.
I'm not suggesting that if you somehow cast two Cure spells simultaneously that you somehow get a Channel Energy, just that in a sense, we are calling LoH, half a Channel Positive Energy Burst.
It appears that we are combining the effects of Cure spells and Positive Energy to describe how LoH works. I'm okay with it, just seemed wonky to me, that it wouldn't more closely follow the rules for one or the other.
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
In versions of cure light wounds going back generations of the game, the spell both healed the living and harmed undead. In the Pathfinder beta-version of the rules, Channel Positive Energy both healed the living and harmed undead. Playtesting showed that to be too powerful when the party was fighting their undead clones, and so the final version of the rules developed the innovative mechanic of requiring the cleric to choose whether she wanted to heal her allies or harm her shambling foemen.
The question at hand is whether a paladin's Lay on Hands ability follows the general rules for healing spells, or the more specific rules for Channelling Positive Energy.
Generally speaking, it's a non-issue. Lay on Hands has a single target, so a paladin can never heal and harm it. But I suppose you might not know whether the target was living or, ah, metabolically challenged. The language in the text, in particularly the word "alternately," is ambiguous. Going only by the rulebook, good arguments can be made on either side.
Sean says it works like a healing spell rather than channelling positive energy. There you go.
--
I think that many rules arguments could be conducted better if people approached them with "this is how I'm going to rule at my table, and here's why" rather than "this is how you should rule at your table" either with or without reasons.
Since we are on the topic... something I probably should know before a local starts his new PC...
How does Raise Dead work when cast on a dead Dhampir?
-Matt
.....
Hm. So basically, "does Raise Dead use positive energy?"
I do not know if this has ever been spelled out in a tabletop rpg, but in a lot of fantasy console and pc rpg's, a spell or item that would raise the dead would also insta-defeat an undead enemy, like the phoenix down in the Final Fantasy games.
|
|
If you take the strictest reading of RAW, and I think we all know my thoughts on that, the Raise Dead should work just fine. No where in the description does it list positive energy being involved nor does it have an alignment descriptor.
The spell restores life unless you are a construct, elemental, outsider, or undead.
Fortunately, a Dhampir is only considered a undead creature with respect to positive/negative energy.
Even better for them, they are immune to negative level effects. I expect that would include the negative levels associated with being raised. Guess that makes up for their loss of healing using LoH.
BTW, Resurrection and True Res say nothing about positive energy either.
And just to derail this thread even more, the elemental races (from the bonus boons) are outsiders and therefore, as far as I can tell, not subject to Raise Dead nor Resurrection. You have to upgrade to a True Res. Anyone have 26,530gp or 77 PP laying around for your friendly neighborhood Ifrit/Slyph/Oread/Undine to borrow?
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
And just to derail this thread even more, the elemental races (from the bonus boons) are outsiders and therefore, as far as I can tell, not subject to Raise Dead nor Resurrection. You have to upgrade to a True Res. Anyone have 26,530gp or 77 PP laying around for your friendly neighborhood Ifrit/Slyph/Oread/Undine to borrow?
Although "Aasimars are humans with a signif icant amount of celestial or other good outsider blood in their ancestry," they are outsiders, as well. Same with Tieflings.
|
|
All of the “half” Outsiders you guys listed all have the Native subtype, so they can be Raised, Reincarnated or Resurrected just like other living creatures. Spells like Dismissal and Banishment don't work on them either since they are not extraplanar. Being tied to the material plane does have some minor drawbacks like having to eat and sleep, which “true” Outsiders don’t have to do.
Really?!? Is there some language somewhere that supports that position? It would make a lot of racial-boon players in my area very happy if that is true.
I am unaware of it. The listings in the Bestiary do not seem to distinguish between a "true" outsider vs. a "half" or "native" outsider. The spells only reference "outsider" with no qualifiers.
EDIT--I stand corrected...
"An outsider with the native subtype can be raised, reincarnated, or resurrected just as other living creatures can be."
Well played Vinyc. You have likely educated a large number of society players/GM's with that comment.
|
|
Bob, you show them your throat and they tear it out. Is anyone surprised? The best policy is to never admit you're wrong and deflect the blame if you get cornered. That's the state of things we're most comfortable with. Any amount of humility or self-depreciation is seen as a weakness and dealt with mercilessly ;).
|
@Bob
Sarcasm aside, as I am just literally reading these native outsider posts. When you first said that, I just assumed you never played 3.0/5 forgotten realms setting (Not sure about organized play prior to PFS)where the genassi, tieflings, aasimar's, etc, and so forth were pretty common at my home games. EDIT: My experiences are likely very different from others.
@Peanut Gallery
As far as correcting a player, whether you feel the rule is obscure or not, I think a little more class is needed when correcting someone even if they are leadership. This game has A LOT of little rules, and exceptions, and so forth. Even an experienced GM such as Bob can't know everything, and to think he can...well, it's not that smart IMO.
@Raise Dead Question
My understanding and this is coming from books like complete divine and such from 3.5 era, is that there is no energy involved, you are just calling the soul back to the body.
|
|
Just to clarify, I was responding to Dragnmoon with sarcasm. He added the winky ";)" and we should all know what that means. ;-)
ah, that changes the tone of his comment entirely when you notice that. FYI I have a horrible perception bonus. I feel my earlier post stands as a good rule of thumb, but less pointed at individuals.
|
Hm. So basically, "does Raise Dead use positive energy?"I do not know if this has ever been spelled out in a tabletop rpg, but in a lot of fantasy console and pc rpg's, a spell or item that would raise the dead would also insta-defeat an undead enemy, like the phoenix down in the Final Fantasy games.
There are worse possibilities: the shuffling zombie is restored fully to life, former class abilities power-up.... "Thanks -- hey! I'm an 18th-level sorcerer; and I still hate you!" KA-BOOM!
|
|
I think that many rules arguments could be conducted better if people approached them with "this is how I'm going to rule at my table, and here's why" rather than "this is how you should rule at your table" either with or without reasons.
In light of that, this is how Im going to run it at my table, and here's why:
~Cure spells will hurt. Inflict spells will heal.
~LoH will hurt, whether coming from itself or another.
~Channel Positive (when directed to heal the living) will hurt it, as the defintion of Negative Energy Affinity says that 1) It is alive (meaning it would be affected by the positive energy), and 2) it says it treats curing positive energy as harmful (paraphrased).
~Channel Positive (when targeted to harm undead) will do nothing to it, as NEA says it is alive.
~Channel Negative Energy (when targeted to heal undead) will do nothing to it, as NEA says it is alive.
~Channel Negative Energy (when directed to harm the living) will heal it, as NEA says that 1) It is alive (meaning it would be affected by the negative energy), and 2) it says it treats negative energy as healing (paraphrased).
~It can be the target of Raise Dead, etc, as it is a Native Outsider.
I have read through this entire thread, but skimmed some of it, as it was getting repetitive. Feel free to counter my view of it. Im not trying to defend a stance; this is just how I understand it right now. If you can convince me of the contrary, I'll change my view. :)
|
|
In light of that, this is how Im going to run it at my table, and here's why:~Cure spells will hurt. Inflict spells will heal.
~LoH will hurt, whether coming from itself or another.
~Channel Positive (when directed to heal the living) will hurt it, as the defintion of Negative Energy Affinity says that 1) It is alive (meaning it would be affected by the positive energy), and 2) it says it treats curing positive energy as harmful (paraphrased).
~Channel Positive (when targeted to harm undead) will do nothing to it, as NEA says it is alive.
~Channel Negative Energy (when targeted to heal undead) will do nothing to it, as NEA says it is alive.
~Channel Negative Energy (when directed to harm the living) will heal it, as NEA says that 1) It is alive (meaning it would be affected by the negative energy), and 2) it says it treats negative energy as healing (paraphrased).
~It can be the target of Raise Dead, etc, as it is a Native Outsider.I have read through this entire thread, but skimmed some of it, as it was getting repetitive. Feel free to counter my view of it. Im not trying to defend a stance; this is just how I understand it right now. If you can convince me of the contrary, I'll change my view. :)
The way I see it is:
-Cure Spells cause damage-LoH causes damage
-Inflict spells heal
-Channel positive to Heal has no effect - like it would in a battle against undead
-Channel positive to Harm undead damages - because the Dhampir acts as undead to positive energy
-Channel negative to Heal undead would heal - this is like an inflict spell
-Channel negative to harm living - should have no effect as the Dhampir acts like undead to negative energy
Just how I see it.
|
Venture-Captain, Ireland—Belfast
|
This has made me wonder:
As has been pointed out the rule books have not been written by an infallible hand and as such there will be occasions such a the horse climbing a rope that the rule smiths did not think to cover.
Given the fact that PFRPG is an evolutionary beast occasionally the RAW will not neatly join up.
We cannot assume that we can spot a technicality and exploit it until an employee of Paizo speaks from on high. Otherwise we have horses on trapezes.
That does not mean that something like Sage Advice from the golden age of The Dragon magazine would not be cool.
A monthly q&a where provisional opinions that PFS players can use pending a proper PFSRPG FAQ???
I know that PFS technically uses the same rules as the main game except in specific areas that OP requires. When there is a clear ambiguity then a holding opinion for PFS would leave us no worse off and in many cases better.
Just a thought.
W
This has made me wonder......
This is not directly connected to your post, but hey. lol
What really makes me wonder is why are Common Sense and Compromise thrown out the window when it comes to rules differences and arguments? Are there really that many players out there that must "win" the game and cannot accept anything less than total agreement with their view?
Does every single little thing need to be written down in an official source? In the extreme example used, does a book really need to say that a horse cannot climb a rope, when common sense and the fact that they have hooves and not fingers/toes/paws/etc not make it clear?
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
Enevhar, I agree with you. But go back to the first post in the entire thread. There's a strong movement to keep Pathfinder Society events as uniform as possible. The table GMs are restricted, to whatever extent possible, from exercising the kind of latitude that they would enjoy in their home games.
So far as players want the same thing from GM to GM, there will be pressure to make PFS-OP-wide rulings about this sort of stuff.
Well Chris, I guess we can always point out this paragraph from page 15 of the Guide to players like that:
It is virtually impossible for the campaign management staff to cover every possible situation or rules interpretation. As such, you may encounter rules combinations or questions during the course of a scenario that aren’t covered in this book or the official Pathfinder Society FAQ. In these cases, the Game Master has the freedom to adjudicate the rules as needed to ensure a fun and fair gaming experience is had by all.