|
This is one of those things that's really going to depend on the GM.
Y'know, I'm not so sure about making it a complete absolute on the "unwilling" part(more like evil the vast majority of the time, GM discretion), but I absolutely love that it specified with the implication that willing beings are kosher. Could lead to some very interesting character dynamics.
One other thing, what if the human was bleeding out and/or unconscious? Would they still be considered unwilling?
In my book it would be even more evil as they would be helpless in addition to unwilling.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Your question assumes that no one can commit an evil act on an evil person......just because the target might be evil does not make it alright. The fact they are grapple makes no difference.....that statement assumes that it is ok to do evil things to evil people if they stand a fighting chance. Bleeding our or unconscious? Guess it is okay to do evil things to people if they don't know about it.....
Why not just pay someone to BE willing? The act of feeding is not in itself evil (or they would not have said unwilling). This loophole is fairly large.
|
|
Yeah alright, my GM agrees that in this case it would basically be universally evil. It would be fairly inappropriate character-wise for an inquisitor anyways.This is one of those things that's really going to depend on the GM.
Y'know, I'm not so sure about making it a complete absolute on the "unwilling" part(more like evil the vast majority of the time, GM discretion), but I absolutely love that it specified with the implication that willing beings are kosher. Could lead to some very interesting character dynamics.
Well, if they're bleeding out wouldn't letting all that blood go to waste just be well, wasteful? I mean, waste not want not, right?
It would be fairly inappropriate character-wise for an inquisitor anyways.
If you grab the Sin Eater Archetype I can actually see you having excuse to feed on those unwilling. You're just draining away their sins before death. Could also be a great schtick to get willing cattl.. eh people
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I would say that doing it in the midst of a life-and-death battle might qualify as less evil even non-evil. After all, sticking a sword through an unwilling creature's guts is normally an evil act...
I believe Paizo has stated that Unconscious=Willing for the purpose of spells.
(I'm not sure whether that was Sean, Jason, or James)
I see no reason to treat spells differently than this...
Thus, if the 'victim' is Unconscious (and thus can't percieve you drinking their blood), it isn't an Evil act.
(the character/their soul has no idea that you killed them in an 'Evil sadistic way' vs. a quick clean death)
Really, the only reason to treat it as an Evil act (vs. just cutting them open with a Scimitar)
is that it is seen as especially cruel or whatever - on that basis, other means of doing HP damage should likely count as Evil as well.
SO... if they are already Unconscious, it seems fine to do without Alignment implications.
Just remember to have a napkin/handkerchief with you :-)
I believe Paizo has stated that Unconscious=Willing for the purpose of spells.
(I'm not sure whether that was Sean, Jason, or James)
I see no reason to treat spells differently than this...
Thus, if the 'victim' is Unconscious (and thus can't percieve you drinking their blood), it isn't an Evil act.
(the character/their soul has no idea that you killed them in an 'Evil sadistic way' vs. a quick clean death)Really, the only reason to treat it as an Evil act (vs. just cutting them open with a Scimitar)
is that it is seen as especially cruel or whatever - on that basis, other means of doing HP damage should likely count as Evil as well.SO... if they are already Unconscious, it seems fine to do without Alignment implications.
Just remember to have a napkin/handkerchief with you :-)
Unconscious = willing for spells is a matter of not being capable of resisting, not an indication of consent. Kind of a huge difference when you're dealing with alignment issues.
Correct, while "The unconscious are always willing." makes a great orcish proverb, rules wise Unconscious = Willing is only in regards to spells that require willing targets.
http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/magic.html [b]Aiming a Spell... Target or Targets...[b]
Some spells restrict you to willing targets only. Declaring yourself as a willing target is something that can be done at any time (even if you're flat-footed or it isn't your turn). Unconscious creatures are automatically considered willing, but a character who is conscious but immobile or helpless (such as one who is bound, cowering, grappling, paralyzed, pinned, or stunned) is not automatically willing.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
He's not a paladin, so the occassional 'evil act' is still fine. There are many... many... MANY stories/shows/comics about Vampires who feed 'only on the guilty' and 'hate their curse'.
As long as he acknowledges that it's wrong to feed on the living, and tries to 'balance the scales' in some way it could still be fun.
hand waving 'Oh they're evil... it doesn't count' is lame... but KNOWING that it's evil is a whole different story.