|
Iomedae is the lawful good Goddess paladins. Sarenrae is the neutral good Goddess of redemption, healing, the sun, and burning evil things to a nice crisp.They - at the very least - worked together to chain Rovagug.
So, a lawful good Goddess of Paladins working with the Arch-Devil when the stakes were high enough.
And honesty, which is almost always forgotten and ignored by everyone.
I still can't get past the goddess of honesty not being lawful. That just seems wrong to me.
And honesty, which is almost always forgotten and ignored by everyone.I still can't get past the goddess of honesty not being lawful. That just seems wrong to me.
Eh, being honest isn't inherently lawful. I mean just look at Asmodeans! They're law absolute, and they are basically all deceitful. Honesty is more of a good trait than a lawful one, though I suppose a chaotic person is more apt to lie than a lawful one. An Abadaran might be more honest than a Cayden Caileanite , but the Cayden Caileanite is a hell of a lot more honest than an Asmodean!
Sarenrae doing asmodeus's bidding is new to me, what's the story behind that?They - at the very least - worked together to chain Rovagug.
So, a lawful good Goddess of Paladins working with the Arch-Devil when the stakes were high enough.
As stated, that's not Sarenrae's alignment or what she's the goddess of, but I did know about working together agains Rovagug; that's not exactly her doing Asmodeus' bidding though, just cooperating with him.
*Dons Asmodean hat, sharpens nib*Define honesty.
Well the dictionary definition is "fairness and straightforwardness of conduct," which I think we can all agree most correspondences/ negotiations with most Asmodeans are anything but. Then again you can argue the exact definition of fairness and it's subversiveness, but that's for another thread.
Edit: Oops. Subjectiveness not subversiveness.
Not sure how to approach the situation.
Would I be way out of character by NOT attacking on site a summoned daemon by a group member?
Addressing the original question here-
Not at all no. I would honestly argue that no paladin should ever attack anyone or anything on sight that is not posing an obvious threat, because the general idea of the class is that you are an enlightened, disciplined holy warrior. Now, maybe if you were, say, a barbarian, already mid-rage, there might be a case to be made for thinking on the instinctive bloodthirsty level of "BIG EVIL LOOKING THING ME SMASH!" but a paladin? No.
Being specifically a paladin of Sarenrae however, I'd say you would be obligated to have a serious talk with the summoner about how he or she is playing with fire by forcing daemons to do their bidding and what sort of thing it conveys about their character (in the moral sense of the word).
as to the paladin there is the greater good clause.
the summoned critter isnt sitting down to have tea with it.
The evil guys they are fighting are doing a fine job of beating the heck out of the summon, the paladin doesnt need to to anything. As long as the summon goes away after the fight and doesnt carry the summoners laundry basket, it's a means to an end.
I'd treat it like the new guy in church saying inappropriate things like he doesnt know better.... insulted, but tolerant.
Now if your summoner body is trading with summons for power and getting the devil bound template, we have a whole 'nudder bag of worms.
But a Paladin can't hold others to his standards, and why would he waste attacks on the temporary evil guy when the permanent ones are still running around.
If a paladin walked around the corner and saw a devil choking a demon is he going to intervene, or wait to see who wins and deal with the victor?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The ends justify the means is not a paladin code. It's a first and very seductive step on that slippery slope.
==Aelryinth
The ends justify the means is not a paladin code. It's a first and very seductive step on that slippery slope.
==Aelryinth
...Under exceptional circumstances, a paladin can ally with evil associates, but only to defeat what she believes to be a greater evil. A paladin should seek an atonement spell periodically during such an unusual alliance, and should end the alliance immediately should she feel it is doing more harm than good...
Edit: there is nothing in the paladin code about not allowing evil to fight evil. A demon Savagely attacks the evil grow priestess that was sacrificing babies.... oh heavens no make it stop!
The Daemon is summoned to fight some orcs.... erm dude, let's put the outsider toy away... we can handle this one.
yes the paladin could choose to stop associating with the summoner. However depending on the circumstances, it may be the best course of action for the time being (on the road the destroying the evil necromancer)
The pally doesnt have to sit down and share a mug of meade with the guy, but it's a means to an end to defeat said uber baddy, the paladin isn't ignoring any code, he's specifically allowed to tolerate such unions if there is a foreseeable outcome of defeating greater evil.
To gather loot and build a castle? no.
To defeat the witch king of angmar? yes.
Edit: Seelah, a paladin, tolerates Seltyiel, a LE EK, for her ENTIRE career (levels 1-18) during the CoT AP. What evil things does Seltyiel do? It specifically states int he write up Seelah hopes to redeem Seltyiel, meaning she knows dang well what his alignment is. Does she throw her arms and give up if Seltyiel summons evil outsiders to fight for him against to endless number of devils they encounter in this AP? Nope. Does Seltyiel change his alignment by the last AP? Not as far as the Devs have written it.
18 levels of putting up with seltyiel is a Dev set precident that the Paladin can do fine putting up with unorthodox behavior as long as the end justifies the means. Seelah herself is comiting no willing evil acts.
your specific character may have a reason (and playing this character could cause group problems if you're 'electing' to cause problems with other PCs), but paladins as a whole shouldn't have a problem with working with such an ally. if the ally's long term trajectory isn't conducive to the paladin's aims, it may not be a long lasting alliance, but that isn't really particular to summoning evil outsiders.
|
I have to add my support to the "tolerate but don't condone" crowd here. Allow it if the summoning is in the heat of the moment for battle, but afterwards have a chat with the summoner about why a daemon was chosen for a summons and not something else. And then, without being self-righteous or angry, insist to the summoner that he/she look for alternatives to daemon-summoning, not just for the sake of your code but for the safety of the summoner's physical and spiritual health as well, because if it continues, the daemons will eventually rip his soul from his body as recompense. And that just sucks.
But also bear in mind that the summoner is a PC too, and his/her player may have specific character goals or ideas in mind. If the summoning of daemons is an important part of the character's story, then you may need to have an out-of-character conversation to avoid creating conflict at the table.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Put it like this, if you are fighting a horrible murderous foe, would you rather see an angel get summoned and hacked to death by it, or a demon summoned and get hacked to death by it?
"the enemy of my enemy can duke it out while I snack on chicken wings"
It seems to me most of the people that think the paladin should allow this are doing it for non roleplaying reasons. Its not that a paladin of Sarenrae should or should not do something but rather there idea of a good player should not do something. I find it interesting that everyone gets up in arms about pallys forcing their chars on others but no one seems to care if a the summoner is forcing his concept on the rest of the group. Why is is that the people who want to play selfish psychopaths aren't doing any thing wrong but those who want to play upright and noble characters are always getting thrown under the bus.
And is is just me or if you where in the heat of battle and not meta gaming(knowing what spell your caster was casting) and Daemon showed up across from you(and you recognized it for what it was) your first instinct wouldn't be to smite it with extreme prejudice. If you see a creature of unredeemable evil your first instinct should be to smite it down and if you don't every life it takes is on your soul and you should redeem(just as the pally would if they let a servant of the rough beast take lives through their in action). There are a lot of things a paladin should be pragmatic about and work with your group but I don't think this is one(and if you ruin another PC's concept because he can't summon Daemons there was no way they were ever going to get along with any well played pally anyway).
Meta game? I'm not sure knowing your ally has summoned a monster is meta game. Pally's get spellcraft too. and the guy in the robes waving his hand and shouting magical incantations and "poof" a monster appears isn't a far stretch even for a pally with an Int of 9.
Now had the pally entered the room after the summoning had been cast, and wasn't aware it was a summoned creature (it wouldn't have the neon sign on it's back saying summoned critter)
it would be apparent WHAT the summoned monster was doing.
If the Evil Outsider is attacking a mob of orcs and your wizard friend is off to one side, apparently watching the battle, there could be a reasonable situation to get a sense motive check to see what's transpiring here.
Are any of your allies attacking the outsider? Is the outsider attacking your allies? Why are the orcs attacking the outsider, do the ORCS need help?
Again if a Paladin wandered into a scenario with a Devil fighting a Demon....does he help? Does he watch? What exactly is going on here?
What about other summoned creatures, you know the ones that DONT have the celestial template but have the OTHER one?
What if the Outsider was part of the bad team and the wizard cast charm monster and then turned the outsider on his former allies? Would the Paladin still attack it? Or let it go, for now?
How is a summoned and controlled monster different than an preexisting controlled monster.
Can't the summoner make the outsider go bye bye when the battle is over? There isn't an opportunity for the summoned outsider to be free willed and commit acts of atrocity, is there?
Is the summoner making treats and pacts with outsiders? no, not at this spell level. Planar ally spells are a BIT different, as are other dealings with outsiders and spells/rituals performed.
This is a "do my bidding" spell. If i was going to sacrifice a meat bag to the forces of the enemy, it might as well be something that is no loss.
Does the summoning harm my fellow wizard? Is he having tea and trading cooking recipes with the outsider? Is there a possibility (even remotely) for the outsider to get out of control or gain free will? Can the outsider stay here?
This doesn't seem high on the paladin's priority list, IMO
|
And is is just me or if you where in the heat of battle and not meta gaming(knowing what spell your caster was casting) and Daemon showed up across from you(and you recognized it for what it was) your first instinct wouldn't be to smite it with extreme prejudice.
In the heat of battle your first instinct would be to deal with the immediate threat. You'd be unlikely to cross the battlefield to take down a daemon if there was a horde of orcs attacking you right now.
Also, would you attack a daemon with extreme prejudice? Even a Paladin that has taken an Oath Against Fiends is only required to attack a daemon if they believe they have a reasonable chance of winning (Ultimate Magic p61). A paladin who hasn't taken such an oath would still have the freedom to make a prudential judgement - is this being posing threat to me and mine?| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
And is is just me or if you where in the heat of battle and not meta gaming(knowing what spell your caster was casting) and Daemon showed up across from you(and you recognized it for what it was) your first instinct wouldn't be to smite it with extreme prejudice.In the heat of battle your first instinct would be to deal with the immediate threat. You'd be unlikely to cross the battlefield to take down a daemon if there was a horde of orcs attacking you right now.
Also, would you attack a daemon with extreme prejudice? Even a Paladin that has taken an Oath Against Fiends is only required to attack a daemon if they believe they have a reasonable chance of winning (Ultimate Magic p61). A paladin who hasn't taken such an oath would still have the freedom to make a prudential judgement - is this being posing threat to me and mine?
Your argument doesn't counter mine. Your talking about a normal pally that has taken the oath against fiends and indeed you may be right. The code of Sarenrae operates differently. The oath of fiends doesn't supersede a god's code it adds another element to it. If the Pally was required by there god to kill devils on sight they wouldn't now be required to do less because they took the oath. If you disagree with my interpretation of the code that's fine but we are arguing apples and oranges. The codes in Faith's of Purity aren't always the clearest things in the world so it is possible to interpret them as you do but I think the path a pally is more likely to choose is striking down a Daemon's and other evil outsiders.
As far as crossing the battlefield to strike at the Daemon that adds facts I didn't use into the analysis. Yes it would indeed be stupid to run across the battlefield with no regard from safety. I was assuming that the Daemon appears in melee(flank buddy perhaps or within reach). Given the choice of a rapidly appearing Daemon or an orc that's not hard and I'd engage the daemon. In your circumstance I would continue fighting the orcs but once they where deal with I would go after the Daemon. Afterword there would be a conversation with the summoner. You would have to find out what type of spell was used and why they did it before determining how your relationship will proceed in the future(great fun role playing for those mature enough not to confuse in character conflict with out of character fighting).
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Put it like this, if you are fighting a horrible murderous foe, would you rather see an angel get summoned and hacked to death by it, or a demon summoned and get hacked to death by it?
"the enemy of my enemy can duke it out while I snack on chicken wings"
Summoning doesn't actually work that way though, since summoned creatures can't actually die.
They can, however, cause very real harm within the boundries of summoning. Many daemons have abilities they can use in combat to harm souls, and that's something best left not being brought into the world.
It's honestly best not drawing their attention to your world or those around you.
At least devils want the world and souls around to rule and use and tools, and at least demons want the world and souls around to play with. Daemons though...
If there's one unforgivable sin in fantasyland, it's destroying a soul. Dabbling with daemons means rolling around with the worst of the worst of the multiverse, and summoning them to battle isn't actually hurting their cause or setting them back. A summoned daemon fallen in battle isn't one less daemon in Abaddon.
It's one more daemon that knows where you live.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The ends justify the means is not a paladin code. It's a first and very seductive step on that slippery slope.
==Aelryinth
Which is why killing your otherwise kind and noble malconvoker friend for throwing creatures at the southern ends of the alignment wheel at other creatures at the southern ends of the alignment wheel, creating a win-win situation for Good and the cosmos in general, is a bad plan. Especially if they're your friend.
See how shoddy this line of reasoning is?
Since this is another PC we're talking about, hang the Miko Mikazaki school of paladin from the gallows where it belongs and roleplay the internal moral conflict. If your DM makes you fall for not ruining another player's day, screw them.
No, I see how shoddy your hyperbolic extremes and lack of paladin understanding is.
A paladin is LG, and while they don't have to be a stick in the mud, they don't EVER give in to someone else's warped sense of what 'good' is.You impolitely spew out the paladin would murder a 'Good' (I'm assuming, LE can be kind and noble to the right people, too) soul. That right there is an Evil act, and it won't happen.
The paladin will leave, or he will make the ultimatum to stop summoning daemons, or he goes...and some LN tightass who is NOT LG will happily put a Good character in the ground for the Evil act of summoning Daemons.
Letting Evil fight Evil is fine. Encouraging Evil to fight evil is fine. Using Evil methods to fight evil is NOT permissible to a paladin code, and Summoning Evil monsters is using Evil. To do so is to spit in the face of Goodness, to show that Good is not capable of doing the job that needs to be done, and people should rely on Evil, not Good. The idea that Good people would come to rely on Evil methods is a horrific development, not 'the ends justify the means'. It strikes at the very heart of what it means to be good and noble, usiing the foulest of methods.
It should be noted the malconvokers are not sanctioned by their own faiths, and their discipline is considered heresy and blasphemy by their own religions.
If forcing a character out of the party for a play concept that spits in the face of the paladin and is a blatant attempt to encourage party conflict, then get rid of the summoner. He's delibrately trying to be an arse. One or the other has to go...the paladin has his code, the summoner knows it, and it is the summoner choosing to flaunt the paladin...the paladin's code is open and known, the summoner has the choice, it is HE who is at fault.
In short, this should never have been a problem, it should be worked out ahead of time. The summoner is basically forcing the paladin to give up his character because of his choice of play style; the summoner can choose to play differently, the paladin cannot. The blame is completely on the summoner.
And everyone is staying away frm the 'slippery slope' problem.
You are summoning daemons, demons, devils...evil creatures. They will and should casually do evil as a part of their duties. 'Accidentally' killing innocents, starting fires, ruining lives, perverting instructions. What happens when you summon Evil to fight wild beasts and neutral monsters? What happens when they gleefully go off on some Good creature that pissed you off? What happens when the pragmatic and ruthless method is faster and more appealing then the high and noble one?
You fall down the slippery slope, and you don't come back.
--
And that example with the paladin and the EK is completely irrelevant. The paladin code forbids long term association with evil individuals. That she might be attempting to redeem him does not mean she has to tolerate his attitude for years, especially in combat situations. The fact the writer of that didn't understand the paladin code is not unusual. After all, Paizo recanted on 'paladins of Asmodeus' too. One-offs and short missions might be permissible from need, but long-term association with evil individuals is right out.
==Aelryinth
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You don't seriously think that a summoned creature can't pervert instructions, do you? Can't cause more destruction then was intended? Can't include innocents in an AoE? Bring down a building during a fight? 'Accidentally' poison the well by tossing an undead thing down it?
They may be forced to fight for you, and must obey, but that doesn't mean they can't do MORE then what you tell them to. As a matter of fact, unless you instruct them otherwise, they are totally free to do whatever they pretty please until you give them orders. I can totally see a demon taking an AoO on a fleeing villager...it's a free attack, and it prevents his opponent from charming and using the villager, so the villager is a potential enemy and should be put down. And throwing the burning devil through a flammable hut interrupts its line of sight and the fire that develops will remove cover for any other bad guys who want to sneak around in it.
Summoning up Evil things and having no consequences for it? Utterly wrong. Demons, devils and daemons are not constructs. They are incredibly intelligent and totally Evil creatures looking for the subtlest ways they can be totally wicked.
And loudly proclaiming that a saintly character is relying on the forces of darkness to do all his work for him, instead of the minions of light and goodness? Just the sort of thing that should happen. They should loudly proclaim their approval of his actions, and wish that more mortals thought exactly the same way.
===Aelryinth
|
|
Your talking about a normal pally that has taken the oath against fiends and indeed you may be right. The code of Sarenrae operates differently. The oath of fiends doesn't supersede a god's code it adds another element to it. If the Pally was required by there god to kill devils on sight they wouldn't now be required to do less because they took the oath.
I totally agree, the additional code should supplement the deity code. However, the deity code says nothing about evil outsiders, it only mentions followers of Rovagug.
The codes in Faith's of Purity aren't always the clearest things in the world so it is possible to interpret them as you do but I think the path a pally is more likely to choose is striking down a Daemon's and other evil outsiders.
Where there's an ambiguity in a code, the usual way to deal with it is to give advantage to the signatuary of the code, in which case it is the individual paladin's discression as to how they interpret it. I actually believe this argument ought to be happing in-character during a game rather than out-of-character on a message board. If you can agree to that I'll be satisfied.
Where there's an ambiguity in a code, the usual way to deal with it is to give advantage to the signatuary of the code, in which case it is the individual paladin's discression as to how they interpret it. I actually believe this argument ought to be happing in-character during a game rather than out-of-character on a message board. If you can agree to that I'll be satisfied.
Fair enough. I agree that the final interpretation of the code should be decided in each game between the pally and the DM. Any code written in hyperbole is going to have room for interpretation and as long as the player shows they have put serious thought into what there code means i'm not going to fault them for any reasonable conclusions they draw. I think the code can be limited to only needing to destroy Rovagug's minions but it doesn't need to be read that narrowly.
|
|
I agree that the final interpretation of the code should be decided in each game between the pally and the DM. Any code written in hyperbole is going to have room for interpretation and as long as the player shows they have put serious thought into what there code means i'm not going to fault them for any reasonable conclusions they draw. I think the code can be limited to only needing to destroy Rovagug's minions but it doesn't need to be read that narrowly.
I think this might be a good in-game discussion. While sitting around a campfire, the paladin might express his concern to the wizard for summoning fiends in that last battle the party narrowly escaped. The rogue, who has ranks in Profession (Lawyer), asks for a copy of the code and asks the wizard to pay him for representation, etc.
|
Put it like this, if you are fighting a horrible murderous foe, would you rather see an angel get summoned and hacked to death by it, or a demon summoned and get hacked to death by it?
"the enemy of my enemy can duke it out while I snack on chicken wings"
The danger of summoning evil outsiders to do your dirty work is the following:
(1) Summoned evil outsiders do not simply disappear if they survive. They are still out there.
(2) Evil outsiders generally view the act of someone summoning them as a sign of extreme disrespect. One could also say it lowers their "street cred" amongst others of their kind, because it demonstrates that they are so weak that mere mortals could momentarily bind them to be their lackeys. Such a slight cannot go unanswered, because the appearance of weakness is a death sentence to most species of evil outsider.
(3) Evil outsiders have extremely good and extremely long memories, and if you summon them, you had better believe that most of them will remember your face, your smell, the sound of your voice, etc. And they will most certainly remember the names of the party if they manage to learn them.
(4) Evil outsiders are, as their name denotes, evil. If a Devil, Demon, or Daemon realizes it is not strong enough to take on the person or group who summoned it directly, it may instead start to murder and kidnap friends and loved ones of the party members. They may even blackmail other members of the group to kill the summoner by holding members of the party's families hostages. And that is probably some of the lighter things that an Evil Outsider might think of doing. Remember, there is a reason the souls of these evil outsiders were originally sent to Abaddon, Hell and the Abyss. They were the worst of the worst. There are no limits to their cruelty and depravity save the outer limits of their warped and perverse imaginations.
Evil outsiders should not be summoned lightly (or at all, really), because, as was pointed out, most of them are extremely intelligent, extremely vindictive, and have no compunctions against committing the most horrendous atrocities to press home the fact that they are no mortal's plaything.
I would not have to be a Paladin to have a major problem with a group member summoning evil outsiders. I would simply have to have the scantest knowledge of these evil outsiders and be sane to have a problem with it. Indeed, you could be role-playing an evil character who is more than a little bit troubled to be faced with a Demon or Daemon. When the Leukodaemon vanishes after having been summoned and plaguing the orcish horde with a wasting illness, I might turn angrily to the summoner and yell "You idiot! You let that thing see our faces! What is wrong with you?! Do you want to wake up to a bout of ebola?!"
so summoning a lemure will get me it's ire? Perish the thought!
*runs screaming into oblivion*
|
|
so summoning a lemure will get me it's ire? Perish the thought!
*runs screaming into oblivion*
*laughs*
Well, some evil outsiders pose a more obvious threat than others.
But who knows? The lemure may very well gain some infernal promotion within your lifetime. And you had best believe that a former Lemure's s*** list is a hundred miles long by that point, with the most easily dealt-with targets being the mortals who summoned it like a performing monkey.
Or worse, perhaps the Lemure's devil superior doesn't take very kindly to adventurers "borrowing" its minion. The superior may then send some hurt your way as punishment for your impudence and trespass against what he/she views as his/her property. Devils are nothing if not equally prideful and vindictive, ready to punish any slight against them.
I think the more important question is, do you think it would be fun for the player who is having an awesome time summoning demons and suchlike for you to start giving him a hard time about it?
This is why I don't let paladins play in my games. There is way too much of a tendency for them to become the fun police.
Cross off "paladin" on your sheet and write "awesome magical knight guy that likes to go on adventures with other people and let them have fun however they enjoy the most, while I have fun however I enjoy the most."
Pretend alignment doesn't exist, and just go have fun!
That's my 2 cp at least...
attacking a summoned creature would not be out of the question- but how much does the paladin know about what's going on? does he have ranks in knowledge [planes]? if not, how does he even know its a demon? does he have spellcraft? if not, would he even know it was summoned (as opposed to storming in on its own to try to kill him), or that it wasn't some illusion? how's his sense motive? if its low the summoner may just be able to lie and tell him its an illusion or make up some other explanation.
the bigger issue, i think, is the summoners alignment... as was pointed out, summoning spells gain alignment descriptors matching any subtypes of the creatures they summon- so it is an [evil] spell when you use it to summon demons. i know there's been some debate about whether (or how much) casting an [evil] spell intrinsically counts as an evil act, but obviously continual use does, and should shift his/her alignment over time. i think the paladin and summoner need to talk (perhaps both in and out of game) and see if there's a friendly solution (like summoning celestial creatures as much as possible, which are generally better anyways), otherwise one of the characters may need to retire for everyone to keep having fun (or else conflict may be inevitable).
|
|
Cross off "paladin" on your sheet and write "awesome magical knight guy that likes to go on adventures with other people and let them have fun however they enjoy the most, while I have fun however I enjoy the most."
*writes in "Anti-Paladin"*
attacking a summoned creature would not be out of the question- but how much does the paladin know about what's going on? does he have ranks in knowledge [planes]? if not, how does he even know its a demon? does he have spellcraft? if not, would he even know it was summoned (as opposed to storming in on its own to try to kill him), or that it wasn't some illusion? how's his sense motive? if its low the summoner may just be able to lie and tell him its an illusion or make up some other explanation.
Depending on the creature, if the Paladin uses his "Detect Evil" ability, he will quickly find that the outsider metaphysically radiates an aura of undeniable malevolence.
lol- plan B: try to ask summoner to change; when he doesn't, lose it and murder him in cold blood; after falling, instead of seeking redemption convert paladin levels to anti-paladin levels; turn to summoner's player and say "good news, you can summon demons all you like now... with your next character"
so summoning a lemure will get me it's ire? Perish the thought!
*runs screaming into oblivion*
*laughs*
Well, some evil outsiders pose a more obvious threat than others.
But who knows? The lemure may very well gain some infernal promotion within your lifetime. And you had best believe that a former Lemure's s*** list is a hundred miles long by that point, with the most easily dealt-with targets being the mortals who summoned it like a performing monkey.
Or worse, perhaps the Lemure's devil superior doesn't take very kindly to adventurers "borrowing" its minion. The superior may then send some hurt your way as punishment for your impudence and trespass against what he/she views as his/her property. Devils are nothing if not equally prideful and vindictive, ready to punish any slight against them.
I like this idea, however it doesn't say any of this about the mere monster summoning spells. elaborating on things like this runs the risk of players jumping up and down about punishing them for certain choices in character creation.
Casting evil spells dont make you evil!
Summoning devils is totally doable by my LG Aasimar! It has NO effect on me what so ever.
blah blah blah etc etc.
does a dire badger come back and bite you in your sleep because you summoned it? No.
then the players will argue the raw to the ends of the earth that they can do whatever they want.
Heck why roll dice, I might "limit" someones imagination!?
|
|
I think the more important question is, do you think it would be fun for the player who is having an awesome time summoning demons and suchlike for you to start giving him a hard time about it?
This is why I don't let paladins play in my games. There is way too much of a tendency for them to become the fun police.
Cross off "paladin" on your sheet and write "awesome magical knight guy that likes to go on adventures with other people and let them have fun however they enjoy the most, while I have fun however I enjoy the most."
Pretend alignment doesn't exist, and just go have fun!
That's my 2 cp at least...
This is a thought process that I see come around quite a bit. Even in the game that I currently play as there is at least one player who holds to the idea that the Paladin class is intrinsically an "anti-fun" creation in the fact that they seem to project a personality and preference to do things on the up and up.
This always however needs to be considered in the context of the adventure and module being played. If it is an adventure with evil characters in mind then sure, so be it the character is completely out of place as a paladin. However, I feel that if the campaign is calling for heroics and being an all around good guy, they are designed for that adventure and to say otherwise seems to say that the class in itself has no place.
I feel that when a paladin is rolled , at the very least it should be communicated with the other players so that they know, if they raise an issue then you can talk to figure out if it is a good fit in the party. If no objections are raised and they game commences and THEN they have a problem with the paladin, there is only so much that can be done. I feel it is wrong on BOTH angles to make a character behave in a way that constantly provokes retaliation from another party member.
That being said, on the issue at hand I would imagine the Paladin would not like or condone that idea and urge the summoner away from gambling with their soul in the future. Plead to their good nature and help them walk the path of redemption. If they refuse then inform them that when their heart beats with the ichorus blackness of hell, you will be there to redeem them. Willing or not.
|
Put it like this, if you are fighting a horrible murderous foe, would you rather see an angel get summoned and hacked to death by it, or a demon summoned and get hacked to death by it?
"the enemy of my enemy can duke it out while I snack on chicken wings"
That was my 2E wizard, he would never inflict the pain of being forced into combat on a goodly creature
|
|
I like this idea, however it doesn't say any of this about the mere monster summoning spells. elaborating on things like this runs the risk of players jumping up and down about punishing them for certain choices in character creation.Casting evil spells dont make you evil!
Summoning devils is totally doable by my LG Aasimar! It has NO effect on me what so ever.blah blah blah etc etc.
Indeed, and it would probably behoove a GM to remind those players who simply focus on the mechanics of the game and spells that they are playing an RPG in a Fantasy story setting, and not in a fantasy video game. Just because not every last iota of information is described in the mechanics of the spell does not mean there cannot be more dire consequences within the story's plot for having cast it.
Further, it might also be important to show how the unintended consequences of how the world reacts to the PCs summoning evil outsiders. Many communities that had been open and friendly to the PCs might suddenly close their doors to the party on account of their "cavorting with demons." Word will quickly spread of a party of adventurers that command the forces of darkness. When the party approaches fortified towns and castles, the gates will be barred and the guards and militia on the walls will state something along the lines of "We're good god-fearing people here. We don't want your ilk anywhere around us. This is your one warning: begone and do not return."
The PCs might even become the center of blame for any foul play that befalls a particular town or village, i.e., "I know it was those demon-summoning adventurers what kidnapped the priest's daughter! Probably to sacrifice her to their foul lord! Hang 'em from the highest tree I say!"
On top of that, the PCs may instead be approached by rather foul characters who start to crawl out of the woodwork after hearing tell of their infamous exploits such as Diabolists, Souleaters, Demoniacs and Anti-Paladins who feel they might find kindred spirits/useful tools within the party. And these are only a few of the possible and uncomfortable consequences of dirtying one's hands by allowing oneself to bring evil outsiders into the world.
does a dire badger come back and bite you in your sleep because you summoned it? No.
then the players will argue the raw to the ends of the earth that they can do whatever they want.
Heck why roll dice, I might "limit" someones imagination!?
Actually, if anything, I think that this would make (good) players realize that their actions have consequences that can affect their characters and the world around them. They cannot simply use spells on the assumption that the world works on video game logic, and that demons and devils simply disappear into nothingness after they have been summoned.
Players should also be reminded that there is a qualitative difference between summoning an animal versus summoning a highly intelligent and murderous outsider who would as soon torture and kill the players as look at them were it free to do so.
I like this idea, however it doesn't say any of this about the mere monster summoning spells. elaborating on things like this runs the risk of players jumping up and down about punishing them for certain choices in character creation.Casting evil spells dont make you evil!
Summoning devils is totally doable by my LG Aasimar! It has NO effect on me what so ever.blah blah blah etc etc.
Indeed, and it would probably behoove a GM to remind those players who simply focus on the mechanics of the game and spells that they are playing an RPG in a Fantasy story setting, and not in a fantasy video game. Just because not every last iota of information is described in the mechanics of the spell does not mean there cannot be more dire consequences within the story's plot for having cast it.
Further, it might also be important to show how the unintended consequences of how the world reacts to the PCs summoning evil outsiders. Many communities that had been open and friendly to the PCs might suddenly close their doors to the party on account of their "cavorting with demons." Word will quickly spread of a party of adventurers that command the forces of darkness. When the party approaches fortified towns and castles, the gates will be barred and the guards and militia on the walls will state something along the lines of "We're good god-fearing people here. We don't want your ilk anywhere around us. This is your one warning: begone and do not return."
The PCs might even become the center of blame for any foul play that befalls a particular town or village, i.e., "I know it was those demon-summoning adventurers what kidnapped the priest's daughter! Probably to sacrifice her to their foul lord! Hang 'em from the highest tree I say!"
On top of that, the PCs may instead be approached by rather foul characters who start to crawl out of the woodwork after hearing tell of their infamous exploits such as Diabolists, Souleaters, Demoniacs and Anti-Paladins who feel they...
Agreed.
For the record Seltyiel is both the iconic magus and the iconic EK
Damn good thread. Damn good question. Damn good responses.
In my homebrew, my screwed up paladins would have no problem with someone summoning a demon or an angel or anything of that sort beyond a raised eyebrow and maybe words afterwards- and they would be just that, words. Summoned creatures are very clearly not real in any sense, being composed of ether and willpower.
Called creatures are a different story.
If I were playing a paladin in this game, I would wait until after the fight was over and keep a claustrophobically close eye on the summoner, waiting for them to display more signs of the evil that is surely encroaching upon their soul before challenging them to single combat. If I am their friend and ally, I will keep a more relaxed eye on them and pray for their soul on a nightly basis, that they turn away from their path. If they don't, I will buy them a favorite drink and meal before challenging them as listed above, and after their death and lavish funeral, take out my anger and frustration on the dark god that clearly corrupted my friend.