|
Can a paladin be a paladin of Pharasma, dedicated to the eradication of the undead? Would htis be legal for Pathfinder Society organized play.
Paladins and Gods are a soar subject in PFS Org play, there has never been an definitive answer from the PFS organizers on this. The problem is the the PFRPG rules do not state otherwise that there are any restrictions on Gods, but the setting has put restrictions on them.
That said, In Golarion only Gods that are Lawful Good or 1 step removed from Lawful Good have Paladins following them, and even then I am not sure all those have Paladins.
In the setting Pharasma is not known to have Paladins.
Can a paladin be a paladin of Pharasma, dedicated to the eradication of the undead? Would htis be legal for Pathfinder Society organized play.
It probably would not be legal. If you choose to worship a deity, you have to be within one step of their alignment: Erastil, Iomedae, Shelyn, Torag, Sarenrae, Abadar and Irori can have paladins. If you wanted to focus on eradicating undead, Iomedae is just as good if you know who the Knights of Ozem were.
Can a paladin be a paladin of Pharasma, dedicated to the eradication of the undead? Would htis be legal for Pathfinder Society organized play.It probably would not be legal. If you choose to worship a deity, you have to be within one step of their alignment: Erastil, Iomedae, Shelyn, Torag, Sarenrae, Abadar and Irori can have paladins. If you wanted to focus on eradicating undead, Iomedae is just as good if you know who the Knights of Ozem were.
Irori could, in fact, have paladins, but according to Faiths of Balance, he does not have any.
|
Actually, if you read Faiths of Balance, the Church of Pharasma doesn't sponsor an ORDER of paladins, but that doesn't necessarily mean that there can't be one or two running around. Heck the Undead Scourge and Oath against Undeath seem to be two types of Paladins she would love to have.
The problem is that Paladins are LG, while Pharasma is TN. Even though thematically, it makes perfect sense for there to be Paladins of Pharasma, there is that issue of being only one step from their alignment.
|
|
To my knowledge, only Clerics and Inquisitors need to be within one alignment step of their deity, unless I missed a FAQ somewhere
As I mentioned above...Pazio has said they are sticking to the One-Step for the setting gods.
The problem is the the PFRPG rules do not state otherwise that there are any restrictions on Gods, but the setting has put restrictions on them.
That said, In Golarion only Gods that are Lawful Good or 1 step removed from Lawful Good have Paladins following them, and even then I am not sure all those have Paladins.
|
|
As I mentioned above...Pazio has said they are sticking to the One-Step for the setting gods.
As noted in the latest version of the Guide to PFSOP (page 7, under "Religion"):
"Characters may elect to worship an evil god, but must always be within one alignment step of their chosen deity."
Note that this is all characters, not just clerics / inquisitors, and not even just those which receive powers from their gods.
|
|
I'm glad you recognized my tongue-in-cheek suggestion. Too often I get taken literally around here...Pharasma is one step if you count kitty-cornerCome on, now, we both know that doesn't work :P
Sorry, I had a player make that argument for *weeks*. And even in though it was spoken in jest, new players might go "Well, this VC online said....".
I'm turning into a PR specialist lawyer. Someone shoot me....
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Pharasma is one step if you count kitty-cornerAnd, of course, in Pathfinder, the first diagonal step only counts for one...it's the second diagonal step that's actually two steps. ;-)
All diagonal steps actually count as 1.5 steps. In movement, you round down, but in alignment steps, you round up.
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
The problem is that Pharasma and her church are usually portrayed in a kindly light. She's supposed to be Neutral, but she opposes undead, so everybody thinks she's the kind of god paladins would like to hang with.
We need a scenario where Pharasma's church heals and supports an invading orc army, following the prophesies that Trunau shall fall to war and rapine this day.
We need a scenario where secret inquisitors of the Lady of Graves act to prevent the resurrection of a dwarf hero who was cut down by foul betrayal.
We need a scenario where some hideous cult of Lamashtu is trying to kidnap elven women -- for unspeakable dark purposes -- and the church of Pharasma moves to stymie the Pathfinders sent to stop the cult. All births fall under Pharasma's purview, and the Lady of Graves knows what great terrors are a-borning.
A couple of scenarios like that, and paladins will have lost interest in claiming her aegis.
|
|
The problem is that Pharasma and her church are usually portrayed in a kindly light. She's supposed to be Neutral, but she opposes undead, so everybody thinks she's the kind of god paladins would like to hang with.
We need a scenario where Pharasma's church heals and supports an invading orc army, following the prophesies that Trunau shall fall to war and rapine this day.
We need a scenario where secret inquisitors of the Lady of Graves act to prevent the resurrection of a dwarf hero who was cut down by foul betrayal.
We need a scenario where some hideous cult of Lamashtu is trying to kidnap elven women -- for unspeakable dark purposes -- and the church of Pharasma moves to stymie the Pathfinders sent to stop the cult. All births fall under Pharasma's purview, and the Lady of Graves knows what great terrors are a-borning.
A couple of scenarios like that, and paladins will have lost interest in claiming her aegis.
Only problem is, since Aroden died, prophecy hasn't worked. Preventing resurrection wouldn't tweak most characters. And Lamashtu kidnapping elvish women for dark purposes to birth monsters runs smack into Paizo's no sexual violence rule.
And I've always wondered why Pharasma is TN and not LN. She is the judge of the dead, she doesn't play favorites. I've always seen her as the ultimate arbiter, the definition of LN.
|
I have a PFS character that is a paladin of Pharasma. No one has given me grief over it.
I'm playing her not as a paladin, but as a valkyrie-- that is, as the "chooser of the slain" for the goddess of death. I'm just using the Paladin class to quantify the concept.
That said, if the powers-that-be want me to switch her deity, I will do so without any complaints.
But so far, I've gotten no grief.
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
Only problem is, since Aroden died, prophecy hasn't worked.
All the ancient prophesies have come to ruin, true, but prophesy still works fine. Spells like augury and contact other plane are still going strong. Phrasma is the goddess of prophesy; it's part of her portfolio.
Lamashtu kidnapping elvish women for dark purposes to birth monsters runs smack into Paizo's no sexual violence rule.
Then I invite you to come up with a better example of how a true neutral goddess of birth might come into conflict with paragons of virtue and forthrightness.
|
|
All of the good gods are kinda pissed that Pharasma didn't warn them that Aroden was going to die. She subtly gave them all the finger, since it's assumed she knew being the goddess of death. She also strangely has a herald since his death that looks like Aroden. All of this makes me like her all the more. Pharasma is my favorite deity. Followed by Desna, Saranae, then Iomedae.
|
|
The problem is that Pharasma and her church are usually portrayed in a kindly light. She's supposed to be Neutral, but she opposes undead, so everybody thinks she's the kind of god paladins would like to hang with.
We need a scenario where Pharasma's church heals and supports an invading orc army, following the prophesies that Trunau shall fall to war and rapine this day.
We need a scenario where secret inquisitors of the Lady of Graves act to prevent the resurrection of a dwarf hero who was cut down by foul betrayal.
We need a scenario where some hideous cult of Lamashtu is trying to kidnap elven women -- for unspeakable dark purposes -- and the church of Pharasma moves to stymie the Pathfinders sent to stop the cult. All births fall under Pharasma's purview, and the Lady of Graves knows what great terrors are a-borning.
A couple of scenarios like that, and paladins will have lost interest in claiming her aegis.
Chris, I will admit i am not quite sure where you are going with this.
I don't think, just because a character is neutral, they are helping the "good guys" one day, and to "preserve the balance" are helping the "bad guys" the next. Often they have their own agenda which has nothing to do with good and evil. I suppose a couple of examples i could think of, might be a monk seeking enlightenment, a wizard delving into arcane mystereis.. I am sure there are others.
Might i suggest, there are two books, The Prince of Wolves, and more recently Death's Heretic which illuminate the faith of Pharasma. Both books are good reads.
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Where am I going? Not far, Myles.
Pharasma, as you say, has her own agenda. She can, at times, prove cruel, or at other times wicked in her seeming alliance with terrible deeds.
In the same way we never saw the good-aligned members of the Season 2 Shadow Lodge, we never see the terrible side of Pharasma. So people think their paladins would get along with her, all hunky-dorry. "She doesn't like undead, so she's okay in my book." As if she were just another version of Sarenrae, in more desperate need of a nice suntan.
|
|
chris
Point taken
Perhaps the terrible side of Pharasma is much closer and and much more prevalent then we realize.
in every day life in Golaron the terrible side can be seen in death. Everyone dies, (barring un-deah, the sun orchid elixir etc). Perhaps her terrible side might bee seen in the child that dies in a natural disaster, that is taken by disease, etc.......
Ah, well i havn't yet played the end of the year 2 shadow lodge ( wrath of the accursed, the Dalsine affair, You only die twice, mantis prey) so i havn't yet found out how things end and transition from the "evil villanous" shadow lodge, to what they are in season three.
Myles
|
All the talk about paladins and having to be within one step of their chosen deity does not have to restrict them. Core does not require a paladin to chose a deity and the Guide says nothing about requiring it. A paladin can revere the aspects of many gods without actually declaring an official fealty to a single one. My paladin was once a worshiper of Cayden Cailean. However, the rules for society play deny me the ability to make that declaration. So, now he just reveres the aspects of Cayden's portfolio that are in alignment with his paladin tenets. He also has respect for Sarenrae, Phrasma, Iomedae, Irori, Torag, etc. Just because you acknowledge some of a deity's teachings does not mean you have to declare yourself to be a worshiper (whatever that means). The only downside to this is I cannot enjoy all of the benefits of the Tankard of Drunken Hero anymore, but I still have it for thematic reasons.
So can you be a paladin "OF" Phrasma, no, but can you be a paladin who follows the teachings of Phrasma without actually declaring yourself a worshiper, absolutely. Does this smell of moldy gamer cheese, yep. But as long as PFS has the arbitrary one-step alignment rules while still not enforcing it with respect to the paladin class then I see no other choice.
|
|
I was going to say the same thing. It's not like paladins have domain powers or anything of that nature, so the actual choice of deity is irrelevant when you make one.
Play it like AdAstraGames, and you should be fine. If people give you grief, well...
If people gave me grief over what essentially amounts to character fluff, I wouldn't play with them any more.
|
|
I've been playing a Paladin of Pharasma...affiliation. So far it's not been a problem.
I was going to say the same thing. It's not like paladins have domain powers or anything of that nature, so the actual choice of deity is irrelevant when you make one.
While this may be true, but technically we are breaking the rules. Faiths of Purity suggests that only the listed deities have paladins. I can't blame people for calling us "cheaters" if we intentionally ignore the expectations and choose an unapproved deity. Call it fluff, or whatever, but we know that characters must be within one-step of their deity. The only reason we can "get away" with the ambiguity is because paladins are not technically required to worship a specific deity. I caution you not to flaunt it in a player's face that we are choosing to ignore the intention of the rules and hold it against them for reminding us that we are breaking them.
|
|
I've been playing a Paladin of Pharasma...affiliation. So far it's not been a problem.I was going to say the same thing. It's not like paladins have domain powers or anything of that nature, so the actual choice of deity is irrelevant when you make one.While this may be true, but technically we are breaking the rules. Faiths of Purity suggests that only the listed deities have paladins. I can't blame people for calling us "cheaters" if we intentionally ignore the expectations and choose an unapproved deity.
I'll take your word for it. I don't own Faiths of Purity. This actually raises another problem that I've raised before on these boards - you can't expect players to know rules that aren't in the Core Assumption, especially when it says somewhere that something isn't allowed.
I will openly state right here that at my table, I will never restrict or disallow anyone's choice of character crunch based on information that is not in the books that make up the Core Assumption.
Having never been in the position where I sit at a table, have a character audited, and am told I can't play that character because of information in a book I don't have, I don't know what I'd do as a player. I can tell you I'd be pretty pissed off, and I'd likely ensure I never sat at that GMs table again... but whether I'd walk or just pull out a different character, I don't know.
That being said, this issue isn't about crunch anyway.
Fluff is a funny thing, because it doesn't affect gameplay at all... but following from the Reskinning ruling, I can see that the Campaign Staff feel differently about it.
|
|
Sometimes crunch follows fluff. My paladin was created before there was a clarification that if you declare yourself a worshiper you have to be within one step. He was an orphan dwarf, who was shunned by his clan due to his inability to craft (low INT and limited skill points). This led to excessive drinking. His discovery of Cayden was a life changing event. HE dedicated his life to the paladin order and only drank in reverence to his deity. He bought a Tankard of the Drunken Hero. One of the benefits is heroism once per day, with the requirement of being a worshiper. Of course, once the one-step rule went into play, I had to adjust his relationship and lost that crunch.
As far as core, the PFS rules specifically state that if you declare yourself a worshiper, you have to be within one step. Fortunately for us pally players, we have a loop-hole. We are not required to declare a deity. I just think that can be an issue for some players if we use fluffy as justification to break RAW. The same thing can be extended to reskinning and we all know where that conversation led.
|
|
Oh, yeah - I realize that I don't really have a leg to stand on with the alignment thing.
I got a little off-topic, because as a player first and foremost, and one who doesn't own everything that Paizo publishes, it really hits a nerve when someone posts that I can't do something because of a mention in a book I don't own.
Sorry. Got carried away.
|
|
All the talk about paladins and having to be within one step of their chosen deity does not have to restrict them. Core does not require a paladin to chose a deity and the Guide says nothing about requiring it. A paladin can revere the aspects of many gods without actually declaring an official fealty to a single one. My paladin was once a worshiper of Cayden Cailean. However, the rules for society play deny me the ability to make that declaration. So, now he just reveres the aspects of Cayden's portfolio that are in alignment with his paladin tenets. He also has respect for Sarenrae, Phrasma, Iomedae, Irori, Torag, etc. Just because you acknowledge some of a deity's teachings does not mean you have to declare yourself to be a worshiper (whatever that means). The only downside to this is I cannot enjoy all of the benefits of the Tankard of Drunken Hero anymore, but I still have it for thematic reasons.
So can you be a paladin "OF" Phrasma, no, but can you be a paladin who follows the teachings of Phrasma without actually declaring yourself a worshiper, absolutely. Does this smell of moldy gamer cheese, yep. But as long as PFS has the arbitrary one-step alignment rules while still not enforcing it with respect to the paladin class then I see no other choice.
I'm not sure why, but this description made me think of the scene in Star Wars episode 3 where Palpatine tells Anakin, 'Anakin, if one is to understand the great mystery, one must study all its aspects, not just the dogmatic, narrow view of the Jedi. If you wish to become a complete and wise leader, you must embrace a larger view of the force.'
I think I might look into a Hellknight character for something like that. Hmmm.
|
|
Outlawing the production and use of Night Tea - as "birth control" goes against the goddess of birth. Perhaps that would be too lawful though - how about the murder of alchemists selling Night Tea.
Are you suggesting here that paladins would be opposed to birth control? If so, I'm confused as to why. If not, then I'm confused as to what you are trying to say. :P
Just something to think about...
paladin "OF" Phrasma -
paladin "OF" Asmodaus -both two steps away.
paladin "OF" Phrasma - Scurge of Undead
paladin "OF" Asmodaus - Law Giver
And paladins of Asmodeus were acknowledged as a mistake and ruled illegal and retconned out of Golarion if you are playing by the book and not houseruling it in.
And yes, the "Of" is the issue here. Cleric Of Pharasma obviously means the cleric worships and gets power from Pharasma. So to the average gamer and GM, I would think that Paladin Of Pharasma would mean the same thing. So if you are not a worshiper of a deity then do not use "Of" in your character's religious description and you will avoid many misunderstandings and avoid getting your character labeled as illegal.
|
|
Personally, I separate the Law/Chaos part of the issue from the good/evil. I view the former as the paladin's devotion. The lawfulness refers to the paladin's need to uphold oaths, follow rules/laws, etc., not necessarily that the deity itself need be lawful. It is just a reflection of their commitment, some call it zealotry. Their morality is more guided by the good/evil axis. This helps to provide more options for the paladin and makes it a bit more cooperative class, IMO. The more we restrict the interpretation of what a paladin has to be, the more challenging it becomes to play one without being an overbearing, zealot who kills familiars and destroys summoned/animated resources.
But, I am aware that this quickly devolves into another alignment argument that no one can "win." I love the flavor of the paladin class and its varied role, but only when there is some level, even minor, of customization allowed. If everyone has to play the same two or three "tired" stereotypes, what's the point?