| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
undead are no more inherently evil than humans, elves and dwarves are.
i don't buy into this "X race is inherently Evil" BS.
i like moral ambiguity, i like my shades of grey
i hate the simple black and white that it "Orcs, Drow and Undead are evil" and "Humans, Elves and Dwarves" are good
it reeks a foul stench when a player feels justified in killing an NPC or few because of what he or she sees on the surface of the NPC's skin. even in the case of such creatures as fiends and outsiders, i will include lawful evil knight templar angelic assassins and lawful good purehearted demons who actually feel remorse for the sins of their kin and work to reform their bretheren by example.
put the the NPC's status on a different character
"would you feel the same desire to slay the horde of humans you just encountered that you would for slaying the horde of orcs you just encounted under similar circumstances? given that the humans and orcs are identical in every way except appearance"
"but orcs are always evil according to the bestiary, we have to kill them" some players cry, but orcs as just as capable of good as they are capable of evil, much like humans are capable of both.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Ashiel, do you mind explaining why you think Pharasma is a fraud? Or why you think her alignment is suspect? I've seen nothing to support either claim, but I also haven't read every bit of material that Paizo has published either.
Ashiel, I'm about to disagree with you! Bro-hug first, though! You're still super-fly!
(That is, if "super-fly" means "a nifty person that I like immensely"; because that's what I meant up there.)
Firstly because the notion of both free will and predetermined destiny are not compatible.
Actually, it heavily depends on what you mean by "free will" and what you're trying to get out of the meaning of that term.
If you mean, "the importance of individualism" than "free will" can be accomplished in a predestined setting.
If you mean, "the ability to choose anything with no constraints" than "free will" is little different than insanity.
If you mean, "the ability to choose at all" than it depends if the the foreknowledge is a form of predestination (it is due to things being ironclad) or if it is passive (it is due to receiving information from the future), and it depends whether or not it comes with the power to act on that foreknowledge; either way, doesn't mean that "free will" is meaningless, but rather it depends entirely on the entity with the foreknowledge in question, the nature and source of the foreknowledge, and the form that foreknowledge takes.
A lot of people conflate the different meanings to "all of the above" which, you know, is actually impossible under a predestination form of foreknowledge, but not under all forms of foreknowledge.
Supposedly Pharasma knows everything that will ever occur with a person before they are born but "reserves judgment" for after they die. There's a few problem with this. For one, it makes literally everything pointless since it means there is no choice.
Actually, this is false. Choice may very well be involved. Pharasma's foreknowledge does not, automatically, force something into being. One way of looking at it is that she receives her knowledge based on the choices people make in the future. Thus, the choice determines the foreknowledge, not the other way around.
Two, it ruins any semblance of a Neutral alignment because it means that she has the opportunity as a goddess of birth and rebirth to stop evil before it happens. She knows that X is going to end up being some horrible murderer who kidnaps and skins the homeless on the steet, and if his fate is predetermined then he won't (or can't even) choose to do otherwise. But she allows it and then tells him he was a bad boy and sends him to the abyss later.
This is false, IF her foreknowledge is predicated on the choices that are made by the individual, because at the time of birth, the individual hasn't yet made those choices, and thus any actions on her part that alter those choices (such as destroying the individual in question) are acting a) on a currently innocent creature, and b) eliminates her own foreknowledge (preventing her from knowing it in the first place, as it never would-have-happened).
This would make things very odd for her, I'd imagine, and would be something she tends to avoid.
The other, stranger, option, is that she is choosing what's "best" for everyone. There are no shortage of religious views which explain mankind as ultimately something of the longest, slowest, most painful train wreck in history.
In that sort of scenario (let's call it the, "mortals are awful" scenario) Pharasma may well be acting on her foreknowledge (presuming, of course, it's the kind of foreknowledge she can act on, which, as noted above, isn't a given) to choose the least terrible path for all involved... which just so happens to coincide with a bunch of awful people doing awful things for everyone other than themselves.
She's a fraud because there's been several instances where her incompetence was proven. Firstly, it was suspect since she insists she knows the future of every individual when they are born but reserves judgment until they die and are before her. That is like someone saying "I know what you're going to say next, but I'll only tell you after you say it in front of me".
Suspect? Yes. Proof? No.
Especially since her judgement from foreknowledge may well be based on the information that comes to her "from the future", which means, ultimately, that it was the result of will that created the situation in the first place.
Urgathoa's very existence is proof of her fraudulence. Here we have a mortal who is even in the domain of Pharasma herself. Like in her own domain. Her own plane of existence. Where deities basically know everything. And Urgathoa skipped town. Why didn't Pharasma simply stop her when she arrived? She "knows everything" that Urgathoa was ever going to do, which means unless she is a fraud she knew Urgathoa was going to buy a one-way ticket out of the Boneyard.
Again... not necessarily. This argument is predicated on the idea that Pharasma's foreknowledge has the ability to alter things and retain that foreknowledge. She may. She may not. We don't know.
When Aroden died, she didn't foresee it. Or at least her really devoted insist that she did see it but for some reason they nor she can explain she didn't foretell it. Many her her own followers saw her for the fraud that she is, and those that clung to her still insist that she did foresee it and just didn't say because "reasons", all the while trying to downplay her as a deity of fate and prophecy (which she is a failure at) and trying to play up her as a goddess of death and rebirth and babies and stuff. It's totally a PR campaign by the desperate.
Eh... I potentially disagree.
Unable to convince people of the Truth (and having hurt his mind with the stuff he was using to learn stuff about the Doom coming) he made a right mess of things when he tried to avert it and fail.
While one may well (validly) question why she chose not to reveal the end, one of her servants was ultimately able to tease the answer out of the hints he got from her silence and realm... and it broke him. And his attempts to make it better did the opposite.
I see it more as a PR campaign for the desperate church with Pharasma just going, "Yeah, sure, okay, whatever." when they ask if they can do this, because she doesn't care that much.
Beyond the "I know I'm about the throw lots of wolves into the sheep" aspect I touched on before, I further suspect her alignment because again she has her clerics slay any sort of undead they come across based on species rather than morality or harm being caused. The core rules define evil as hurting, oppressing, and killing others. With emphasis on sentient life. There's a few issues with this.
1. Mindless undead have no souls, they're just automatons. So while I actually have no moral troubles with destroying these en mass, it actually does not coincide with the reasoning behind it.
2. It's based on race, not action. All undead, regardless of motivations or activities are to be wiped out. If Pharasma had her way, she would destroy neutral and good undead as well, just for being what they are.
CotCT Spoiler:One such good or at least non-evil undead shows up in the beginning of Curse of the Crimson Throne where you are asked by a kindly ghost to bring an evil man to justice, and then she possesses a set of cards and stays with the party through the campaign.
This is a very loveable character who hurts no one. Her motivations are clearly noted as being interested in helping Korvosa and its citizens. Pharasma and her clerics would see this ghost destroyed out of a blanket hatred for all undead.
In any event, based on her alignment, I would tend to believe that, instead of "GO SMITE", Pharsma commands, "GO LAY TO REST" which, you know, is actually quite different (especially in the case of ghosts, which is the one you pulled up, above).
She abhors the state of undeath, yes, and, by extension, undead. But there are mitigating circumstances to the "auto-smite" button (and it is noted that only a particularly militant wing of her church are focused on the eradication of undead).
In a ghost's case like you described above, I'd see it much more like a parent handling a child who wasn't ready for night-night: the child might not want to go - might even have good reason not to! - but the parent, ultimately, knows it's time for bed; the child needs their sleep, whether they want it or not. Now, her clerics on the other hand... they might "interpret" things more over-zealously than she would. Or the undead might fight back "too hard".
(Also, as a "wiggle room" kind of thing, "good" specifically points out that it applies to "life", so, you know, you could make the argument that undead "need not apply"... though I'm not going to.)
Given that harming and oppressing sentient creatures is evil, that paints a big fat E on the right side of her alignment. So even if we could excuse her "foreseeing" all the evil guys and gals in the world and sending them to do the horrors like you see on Investigation Discovery (horrors unfit for this conversation) as just some sort of cosmic pressuring by the other gods to not tamper with their prospective followers (not that the deities actually need to compete over followers since they could just ask Pharasma how many followers they will end up with if it's predestined, but she probably couldn't tell them anyway), we still have the fact that she and her clerics are genocidal.
And it is genocidal. It's the systematic and unapologetic destruction of sentient existence based on racial qualities, regardless of morality or ethics of the individual being oppressed and destroyed. And "well their souls will move on" is not an excuse, because the same could be said for killing non-undead as well (who too would just go to the boneyard and be sorted).
Pharasma's edicts do not jive with the description of Alignment given in the core rulebook. An uncaring genocidal deity would not be Neutral, it would be Evil. It would be one of the worst kinds of evil.
And here's where you're going only by the "cover" and not by what (may be) in the book.
Pharasma may be "Neutral" instead of "Evil" because she's trying to fix a problem created by Undeath's existence. See, ...
Now, I've heard she brought plague to the world. Not sure how exactly. I guess maybe she brought bacteria and disease back with her? Maybe there was no microscopic life before she returned. Maybe people could shovel rat feces into the mouths as hard as they can while chewing on rusty nails and letting rabid weasels dance in your pants and no bad came of it before Urgathoa landed back on...wait, where did she land exactly? I dunno. Either way, I've no reason to assume disease didn't start with her since that's supposedly a thing.
... you bring up a really good point. Why did "disease" (according to the pathfinder wiki) come when she did? Why is her arrival the "origin" of disease?
My guess? It could be part and parcel of the nature of Undeath as it exists in Golarion. Microbes existed, sure. Bacteria, Virus, all that stuff. But biology handled it. "Disease" as we think of it, couldn't kill.
While not RAW for Pathfinder in general, in Golarion (and related realms) in specific, magic is not as discreet or clean as it would otherwise appear. The Mana Wastes, the Darklands, and the failing magics of Azlant are proof of this.
Similarly, I suspect, Undeath has a similar side-effect. But what?
The subtle weakening of all mortal creatures, thus allowing disease to, for the first time, flourish as a killing agent (and thereby making Pharasma's job much, much harder)? The subtle weakening of all divinity (James Jacobs has said that the gods are all weaker now than they were back when Rovagug was originally chained) - or maybe just Pharasma's (and this may or may not have a "floor" such that "moar undead" doesn't bring it lower, but still)?
This may or may not be, and, if it is, may or may not be known.
Also, the state of undeath (as stated by James Jacobs and implied by one of the books) pulls a soul out of the "proper" cycle of living and death. This tends to cheese her right off (which, you know, given that she's the deity of death, makes sense to me).
Now, let me be clear, here.
I'm not saying that Pharasma is good, nor am I arguing that she's blameless, or all that she claims to be. She may well prove evil by alignment standards and be a fraud.
Rather, I'm pointing out that it's possible, in fact, for her live up to all her claims, be neutral, and still, ultimately, be against undead, and even abhor them. It all depends on how you understand the nature of things.
Also, on Urgathoa's followers,
Reaping
Senior priests of Urgathoa sometimes practice a ritual known as the Reaping. The priest will put on a grey robe, and arm himself with a vorpal scythe. The priest then heads out into the world to cause as much death and destruction as he can before he is driven back to his sanctuary. They believe that if Urgathoa is pleased by the outcome of the Reaping she will grant a boon to the priest
... so, uh, not so keep-to-themselves.
Oh, and one more thing, from the wiki,
Pharasma is also the goddess of birth and prophecy: from the moment a creature is born, she sees what its ultimate fate will be, but reserves final judgement until that soul finally stands before her.
That's... really interesting. It looks mostly (to me) like she sees what their final fate will be, but reserves judgement itself until she actually watches the whole thing play out, and gives points or takes them away based not on the moment of death, but how they lived their life up to that point.
But that's just my reading.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Long post is too long, so I'm doubling it up. Sorry.
It should be noted that I, personally, am not a fan of the "always evil" trope, and am rather against the retcon of the Juju oracle. I get the reasoning. I know why. I still don't like it.
Reference Golarion, however, to me it seems Pharasma generally has less power than we associate a god(dess) with having in certain regards and more than we associate a god(dess) with having in other regards at the same time.
I think this is, at its core, a perception problem based around the definition of the word "god" (or "goddess") and what we expect to get out of that.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Just wanted to say great post Tactics. I'm pressed for time at the moment, but I wanted to chime in and give you the thumbs up.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I have a question regarding the whole Urgathoa and diseases thing:
Is she older than the Daemonic Four Horsemen (The stations, not the ones currently holding them)? I'm asking because there is a Horseman of Pestilence and what is pestilence if not plague and disease?
As far as I know the Horseman of Pestilence is a station that has existed as long as there were Horsemen and they in turn have existed since the birth of Daemon-kind. So unless the Horseman of Pestilence was the Horseman of Pretty-Pink-Unicorns before Urgathoa ascended I don't see how her being the origin of disease can be true.
I'm going to go with - attempting to extend your life beyond its normal maximum term via unnatural means is a sure-fire way to put a black mark against the "good" column. Obviously that still has to be balanced against everything else that person does and believes in.
Personally, I tend to support the view of ascension to god/demigod being the only "good" way to achieve immortality, as a truly good character should probably accept that their allotted time is up (they may not like it, but they should accept that most artificial means of extending it are things they should probably avoid, and conclude that as the alternatives are unacceptable they don't really have any choice.)
I'd be willing to accept arguments for temporary extensions on the basis that they still have important work to do, as long as it isn't simply being used as an excuse, and that their primary goal then becomes ensuring a successor is chosen and prepared.
Just wanted to say great post Tactics. I'm pressed for time at the moment, but I wanted to chime in and give you the thumbs up.
Thanks, bro!
(I certainly enjoyed yours, too!)
I have a question regarding the whole Urgathoa and diseases thing:
Is she older than the Daemonic Four Horsemen (The stations, not the ones currently holding them)? I'm asking because there is a Horseman of Pestilence and what is pestilence if not plague and disease?As far as I know the Horseman of Pestilence is a station that has existed as long as there were Horsemen and they in turn have existed since the birth of Daemon-kind. So unless the Horseman of Pestilence was the Horseman of Pretty-Pink-Unicorns before Urgathoa ascended I don't see how her being the origin of disease can be true.
That... is a very good question.
In fact, she very well may be older than the current one, considering he's the fourth guy to hold the title. The question, then, becomes about the ones that preceeded him.
However, it's worth nothing, that Daemons seem to be relatively young, as a racial type, having come from mortals in the first place. Mortals who were neutral Evil. Mortals like Urgathoa.
More ties between Urgathoa and Deamons: both are gluttonous - the former for whatever, the latter for the souls of mortals.
I wonder, then, if it's something of a classic Chicken/Egg scenario (a question which, actually, I can answer pretty readily, depending on what you believe about the origin of things).
Urgathoa's entry notes,
Her return to the mortal world is said to be the origin of disease.
Bolding mine. So, she might not be. But it certainly seems like she made it powerful.
Ideas could be:
1) pestilence was a Chump horseman before Urgathoa
2) Urgathoa is a destined-to-become Horseman who went, "naaaaah..." and went back and became a god instead
3) Urgathoa accidentally (or purposefully) enabled the four Horsemen to come about
4) something else similar.
So, to sum up: I have no idea.
She does, however, predate that vampire demon lord.
After all... or does she?!
Upon her death, she fled Pharasma's Boneyard and returned to Golarion, making her the Great Beyond's first undead creature.
Bold mine.
Huh. What curiously-specific wording.
She may well not be the first undead in existence. Just the first undead in the Great Beyond. That's... something I never thought of before now.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Just wanted to say great post Tactics. I'm pressed for time at the moment, but I wanted to chime in and give you the thumbs up.Thanks, bro!
(I certainly enjoyed yours, too!)
I have a question regarding the whole Urgathoa and diseases thing:
Is she older than the Daemonic Four Horsemen (The stations, not the ones currently holding them)? I'm asking because there is a Horseman of Pestilence and what is pestilence if not plague and disease?As far as I know the Horseman of Pestilence is a station that has existed as long as there were Horsemen and they in turn have existed since the birth of Daemon-kind. So unless the Horseman of Pestilence was the Horseman of Pretty-Pink-Unicorns before Urgathoa ascended I don't see how her being the origin of disease can be true.
That... is a very good question.
In fact, she very well may be older than the current one, considering he's the fourth guy to hold the title. The question, then, becomes about the ones that preceeded him.
However, it's worth nothing, that Daemons seem to be relatively young, as a racial type, having come from mortals in the first place. Mortals who were neutral Evil. Mortals like Urgathoa.
More ties between Urgathoa and Deamons: both are gluttonous - the former for whatever, the latter for the souls of mortals.
I wonder, then, if it's something of a classic Chicken/Egg scenario (a question which, actually, I can answer pretty readily, depending on what you believe about the origin of things).
Urgathoa's entry notes,
Her return to the mortal world is said to be the origin of disease.Bolding mine. So, she might not be. But it certainly seems like she made it powerful.
Ideas could be:
1) pestilence was a Chump horseman before Urgathoa
2)...
She also lives in Abaddon.
Coincidence? I think not :)
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The Horseman of Pestilence was also the source of
countless diseases, afflictions that he spread across the planes via his wretched and unnatural abominations. With these long-lasting plagues, Azulos drove souls to Abaddon by the thousands, decimating entire mortal
worlds long after the original plague-bearers and their designs were destroyed or forgotten.
So I guess he wasn't a chump Horseman at any moment.
Elsewhere the book also states that many diseases were in fact created by the various Horsemen of Pestilence.As for the origin of the Daemons, the same book states they are the result of the first cataclysmic event after the birth of mortals, when the Boneyard couldn't handle the sudden influx of souls and the basically "spilled" onto Abaddon, which was empty till then (so no Urgathoa yet there either).
Before the coming of mortal life, there were no daemons. Even when the first generations of mortals began to die and make their way to Pharasma’s Court for judgment, from there sent on to the various planes of Outer Sphere to become new entities, the wasteland of Abaddon lay fallow, an unnecessary and forgotten upthrust of stability within the chaos of the Maelstrom.
It wasn’t until the first horrible cataclysms on the Material Plane created an unprecedented torrent of spiritual petitioners that the River of Souls overflowed its banks, and souls bound for Pharasma’s realm washed up on any number of shores.
Some of those came to rest in Abaddon, and it was here that reality itself—tortured by the sudden shock of rage and despair caused by the first mass deaths on the Material Plane—allowed the twisted birth of something new. A singular soul, one filled with more loathing than all the others combined, gestated in its own rage until it erupted into an altogether unique entity: the first Daemon.
Now that was the first Daemon. The book doesn't say anything about the amount of time between then and the birth of the Horsemen.
As for Urgathoa's home in Abaddon, it is supposed to be somewhere within Szuriel's, the Horseman of War, domain. Seems odd if there was a relation between Urgathoa and the Horseman of Pestilence.
EDIT: The old book on the Golarion Multiverse actuallyt has something on this. Seems Urgathoa (and Zyphus) moved in on invitation:
Some mortals wonder why these two gods live on a plane of godless, soul-devouring fiends; the answer is that the daemons invited them. Long ago, Urgathoa and Zyphus had domains on the Material Plane, but at some point—unprompted and unexpectedly—the fiends of Abaddon set aside a domain for each of them and offered to let them stay. Seeing this as a beneficial arrangement, the deities willingly (if warily) accepted. Urgathoa’s influence ends at the boundaries of her deific domain, and she makes no attempts to expand it. Simply put, her interests lie within the mortal realms and not within the blasted wastes of Abaddon.
I do have something for Ashiel though, to fuel her dislike of Pharasma:
It was at this time that one of the daemons—the original, the First whispered out to the cosmos, mocking it, taunting the gods with the knowledge that each soul that came to Abaddon was forever snuffed out, each light extinguished. Among all the gods, only one, the death goddess Pharasma, listened to the voice, as the other deities squabbled in their own wars and conflicts, and remained ignorant of its whispered mockery.
Before long, the low growl of something else replaced it—the cries of thousands of souls, being devoured by the daemons of Abaddon. The cries went on for eons as Abaddon grew, its realms divided up between the greatest of daemonkind. There was no longer just the First—indeed, daemons of all makes and sizes now inhabited the horrid lands, preying upon the River of Souls that led deceased mortals to Pharasma’s Spire. The Styx channeled in evil souls from other planes as well, and the daemons welcomed the castaways with open arms and jaws.
Finally, Pharasma looked down from her throne and realized that she could no longer ignore the voices that whispered at her—four voices where once there had been only one, all wet with unrestrained hunger.
“Give us what is ours,” whispered Pestilence.
“Or we shall take them, even more than we do now,” threatened War.
“We must be fed,” demanded Famine.
Last to speak was Death, who chuckled softly. “You have seen the Beginning and the End,” the Boatman noted. “You know what must be.”
And it was true. With a nod, the Lady of Graves acquiesced, forming the Devouring Court and its gate to Abaddon within the Boneyard. Through it, she began to send those damned souls destined for the new realm of oblivion and unending hunger, delivering them to the Horsemen’s eager embraces. And with each soul consumed in that darkened place, each spark stamped out, the daemons further their goal, and the End draws a little closer.
So Pharasma is actively supporting the destruction of the multiverse through Daemonic means.
PS: Talking about derailing a thread...
Yeah, it derailed pretty hard.
Maybe we should make a new one.
BUT!
There are some interesting things going on here.
We know that Rovagug is a Qlippoth (as per James Jacobs on these threads).
The Daemons created Demons.
The Demons nearly eradicated the Qlippoth.
What if the thing that created the first daemons - that "unprecedented cataclysm" - was Rovagug? Then the Abyss' original inhabitants would literally be the source of their own demise. It would also explain why the gods were busy opposing Rovagug - no one likes Daemons or wants them, and he might have created them by "overloading" the cosmos.
We know that the imprisonment of Rovagug happened in what is called locally the "Age of Creation", however we also know that aboleths existed before this, that they had something to do with the rise of humanity on Golarion and, although the Age of Creation ended when mortals first stepped on Golarion, nothing says that Urgathoa was actually from Golarion. Which is pretty interesting, really, because we know that Golarion is not alone, either in terms of hosting sentient life, or even hosting human life.
Also, if there was an unprecedented rush, given that Pharasma is limited (as all the gods of Golarion are), she may well have not had the wherewithal to prevent Urgathoa from leaving, if Urgathoa was one of those who was caught up in the Cataclysm (or one of them).
One final thought on the nature of Pharasma and her relationship with the Daemons (I'm presuming the spoiler was a quote from the Book of the Damned): it seemed to me, from my reading, that she (felt that she) had no choice. If there is a neutral evil soul bound for the neutral evil End of Line, what else, then, could she do but place them within the Neutral Evil realm (that is, Abaddon)?
Unless, you know, she wanted more Urgathoas running around. In away, Urgathoa's escape may well be exactly what forced Pharasma to give the Daemons their "due"... something that makes Urgathoa even worse in that regard.
Her bringing the power of Disease into the mortal world by her existence is very interesting and, perhaps, key in this whole business.
There's also the question of whether she really was mortal at all. Stories suggest that, certainly, but, ...
There are stories that suggest that Urgathoa was once a hedonistic mortal female.
The stories may or may not be true. She may have been a goddess... perhaps one of those killed by Rovagug, even.
However, our best information is that she was likely mortal, that she is credited with bringing the power of disease (which means it didn't exist or was irrelevant to life before then), and that she was the first undead creature in the Great Beyond (and possibly the first undead creature at all).
Also worth noting, one of her subdomains is "Daemon". So there's that, too.
Reference the derail: first, the thread was necro'd pretty heavily, and second I think we've covered an awful lot of ways that non-evil casters can become immortal outside of lichdom. It's not the same as lichdom, but there are all sorts of ways to go about it.
From this thread...
Casters (or anyone, including casters)
- A few bloodlines or mysteries
- After life of "Good" (whatever that is)
- Alchemist or Wizard Immortality Discovery
- Astral Projection or Lesser Astral Projection <though the the latter is questionable, RAI>, occasionally dealing with other shenanigans, too
- Bestiary 4: Soulbound Shell
- Clone spell
- Demiplane creation shenanigans
- Divinity
- Djezet to become Mezlan
- Living Monolith prestige class
- Ploymorph Any Object
- Reincarnate spell
- Sun Orchid Elixir
- Wish
Non-Casters
- Monk of the Four Winds
Third Party
- Restless Soul
Other Things
- Afterlife Paradise
Older Editions
- Arch-Lich
Setting-Specific
- Baelnorn
- Chosen (though this is questionable in the oldest versions)
- Deathless
- Shade
Of course, my favorite is:
Immortality without becoming undead is available to anyone with money though:Your real body will be inside a bottle and does not require any food or air, nor does it age. You can Magic Jar into your Simulacrum for hours on end, since the spell doesn't require any Line of Effect and the creature cannot disobey an order never to resist.
- Get a ring that'll cast Magic Jar once a day. Better yet: get two.
- Have a Simulacrum made of whatever body you'd like.
- Have the Binding (Minimus Containment) spell cast on you.
EDIT:
Add that to a few clones on alternate demiplanes and a few other tricks, and I'm ready to be rockin' it.
While these are all technically available to anyone who wants it (not just good people - well, with the possible exception of the Good afterlife), that pretty much covers a plethora of options for non-evil people - including good ones.
To me, the reason why someone would go the route of lichdom comes down to a few reasons.
1) Lichdom is permanent. Once it's done, it's done. None of the "maintenance" is needed that the other ones have (except to check on your phylactery, I guess).
2) You get some pretty good perks. The template is well done, and it grants some nice boons for a spellcaster.
3) You don't have to worry about that pesky CON stat. Dumped CON? So long as you have a mediocre or better CHA, you're golden!
4) Unlike we the players and GMs, people "in the world" don't have access to all the knowledge that others do.
5) Though I, personally, like it better, Reincarnate can be interrupted by a death effect. Which would suuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuck.
6) It's faster than most other methods (outside of the easily-interrupted Reincarnate method above).
7) It's unique prerequisites makes you unique, unlike those other posers who all follow the same path or trick. Ego-stroking.
I certainly wouldn't want it. But I can see the appeal.
I like it!
EDIT: moved my discussion/breakdown lower.
How does one become immortal via polymorph any object?
How does one become immortal via polymorph any object?Well if you transformed into a species with a natural lifespan thats indefinate, and the transformation was permanent, you technically shouldn't age for as long as you are that species of creature...
I think that if you changed from a human into an elf via polymorph any object you should have the elfs lifespan for the duration of the spell. Basically until someone hits you with a Dispel Magic, or you step into an antimagic field...
Seems a decent work around to buy the caster some time to figure out a more permanent solution. Although if someone did hit you with a dispel magic (or anti magic fled for that matter) would you revert to your previous "Age" or would time retroactively catch up with you? Seems a pretty go risk.
How does one become immortal via polymorph any object?Well if you transformed into a species with a natural lifespan thats indefinate, and the transformation was permanent, you technically shouldn't age for as long as you are that species of creature...
I think that if you changed from a human into an elf via polymorph any object you should have the elfs lifespan for the duration of the spell. Basically until someone hits you with a Dispel Magic, or you step into an antimagic field...
In 3.5 there was a bit of cheese people wanted to pull where you cast polymorph any object several times in a row to make the last form you were in your new 'base' form. Its a techincally correct reading of the wording for the spell, but at the same time its technically correct to say you can't do that. It was all up to individual interpretation. If you allowed this method, you could transform yourself into a dragon if you had a handful of scrolls, or some help.
This, OR you "Permanently" Polymorph Any Object yourself into "your body as it was when you were <insert age here>.
Depending on the interpretation, your body wouldn't age that way. Or if it did, then you could "Permanently" do it again, later.
EDIT: moved this down here for later to with the conversation better.
RDVRMH's Majar Immortality:
Continuous Magic Jar 90,000
(1/Day) Binding 38,400 (or 51,200) <plus 5,000*HD for the component cost>
(1/day) Simulacrum 26,000 (or 36,400) <plus 5,000*HD for the component cost>
(Costs made with this.)
Nets you a total low-end cost of 154,400 plus 10,000/HD (your own); or a total high-end cost of 177,600 plus 10,000/HD (your own).
Plus one shattered gem will ruin your day.
A lich's 120,000 gold cost and lower-level access, means that lichdom can be had for a comparative steal.
Even if we presume the gem has the hardness and hit points of a rock (something that's not really comparable to reality for most, I don't think), a lich's phylactery is still harder and has more hit points.
I still prefer the Majar method, though. :)
How does one become immortal via polymorph any object?Well if you transformed into a species with a natural lifespan thats indefinate, and the transformation was permanent, you technically shouldn't age for as long as you are that species of creature...
I think that if you changed from a human into an elf via polymorph any object you should have the elfs lifespan for the duration of the spell. Basically until someone hits you with a Dispel Magic, or you step into an antimagic field...
In 3.5 there was a bit of cheese people wanted to pull where you cast polymorph any object several times in a row to make the last form you were in your new 'base' form. Its a techincally correct reading of the wording for the spell, but at the same time its technically correct to say you can't do that. It was all up to individual interpretation. If you allowed this method, you could transform yourself into a dragon if you had a handful of scrolls, or some help.
This, OR you "Permanently" Polymorph Any Object yourself into "your body as it was when you were <insert age here>.
Depending on the interpretation, your body wouldn't age that way. Or if it did, then you could "Permanently" do it again, later.
Permanent is not the same as instant. Polymorphing yourself into a teenager seems like grey area at best. Also, what happens if the magic is suppressed after the maximum age for your base race (human for example)? You die? You start aging again from where you left off?
Permanent is not the same as instant. Polymorphing yourself into a teenager seems like grey area at best. Also, what happens if the magic is suppressed after the maximum age for your base race (human for example)? You die? You start aging again from where you left off?How does one become immortal via polymorph any object?Well if you transformed into a species with a natural lifespan thats indefinate, and the transformation was permanent, you technically shouldn't age for as long as you are that species of creature...
I think that if you changed from a human into an elf via polymorph any object you should have the elfs lifespan for the duration of the spell. Basically until someone hits you with a Dispel Magic, or you step into an antimagic field...
In 3.5 there was a bit of cheese people wanted to pull where you cast polymorph any object several times in a row to make the last form you were in your new 'base' form. Its a techincally correct reading of the wording for the spell, but at the same time its technically correct to say you can't do that. It was all up to individual interpretation. If you allowed this method, you could transform yourself into a dragon if you had a handful of scrolls, or some help.
This, OR you "Permanently" Polymorph Any Object yourself into "your body as it was when you were <insert age here>.
Depending on the interpretation, your body wouldn't age that way. Or if it did, then you could "Permanently" do it again, later.
I think you guys already covered that. Basically, "the rules aren't there" to cover that sort of thing, so it's GM interpretation.
However, it's the difference between "instant" and "permanent" that allows the idea of "eternally young".
If the transition was "instant" I would argue that your body instantly age-regresses, and then ages again.
But instead, you're using (dispellable) magic to "permanently" polymorph into another form. Thus the argument could be made that it doesn't age from that point onward, because the magic holds you in sort of an "age-stasis" ("Permanent" eighteen-year-old body).
However ultimately, it's up to GM interpretation.
The other side of the coin is that you couldn't have the benefit of other polymorph effects on you (the new polymorph rules ensure this), however, you could replace the current polymorph effect (which you aged out of the desired "time" with a new polymorph effect that did the same thing.
Also, JTibbs, "retroactive aging" is silly, but that's not the "problem" as I see it. The question is whether or not your "base" body (the one "underneath" the polymorph, if it is considered "underneath" the polymorph) still ages, while the "outer body" (the one "on top" by way of polymorph) does not.
If it does, that still doesn't mean that you'd die when your "base" form's time is up (though you might, depending on interpretation).
Effectively poly any object to make yourself younger is to buy time to find Somethng more permanent like the ageless discovery.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There is an implied level cap restriction in the rules by not having any option for XP increase after 20th.
The thing with lichdom and being able to enjoy it or not... none of that is RAW or has anything to do with rules as written.
In Golarion, for instance, (as in Faerun) I believe it's implied/presumed/stated that liches cannot use their sense of smell, as they are undead. However in RAW? Liches get a bonus to Perception. Their senses, if anything, seem even more keen.
Demilichdom is no more of a "catch" than lichdom is itself, unless I'm misunderstanding your use of that word. They just obviate the need to have a body at all (outside of their skull).
IF there is no level restriction (such as in 3.0 or 3.5), than yes, someone could (in theory) go with all the available routes though some (such as the Immortality quality of Monks of the Four Winds) would be negated by the state of being a Lich (as you're undead and Reincarnate doesn't work on undead creatures. Though good luck finding the way to get all those levels.
Effectively poly any object to make yourself younger is to buy time to find Somethng more permanent like the ageless discovery.
I could definitely see that. I could also see it as the (presumed) "end game" for someone who doesn't know any better and doesn't like the idea of lichdom.*
Or for a lich.
There's no reason a lich couldn't benefit from the Polymorph Any Object function's ability to... well... polymorph any object (including the lich). Turn himself into a living version of his 18-year-old self, permanently, and enjoy the full benefits of life with the full benefits of undeath.
Although, I have to wonder, can a lich not make his touch attack when he touches things? Because that would suuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuck, and would make Lichdom a whole lot less attractive (and is also likely the kind of thing most people don't know).
Oh, and, personally, I'd make a simulacrum out of this guy, magic jar him, then use Sculpt Simulacrum to look like an Aasimar of myself.
Since Magic Jar isn't a charm or compulsion effect...
That'd put me back a cool 320,000 gold-value for the above trick.
(A solar would be my next choice, which would cost 220,000, followed by a Sovereign Imperial Dragon Great Wyrm or Gold Dragon Great Wyrm - 300,000 either way.)
* Upon achieving it, they may realize just how "fragile" it is, and seek something "better", but then again maybe not. Some people just peak and are satisfied with "mostly immortal". I'd probably be, to tell the truth!
Admittedly if RAW is the primary concern, then it doesn't matter. Demilichdom is pretty much when the lich starts to lose his sense of self and deteriorates (the phylactery also crumbles to dust. The demilich becomes harder to keep dead, but his phylactery is certainly gone). Awakened demiliches are when the self returns.
Demilichdom is no more of a "catch" than lichdom is itself, unless I'm misunderstanding your use of that word. They just obviate the need to have a body at all (outside of their skull).
You know, I actually forgot the Pathfinder version of demiliches? Wow. I'd totally forgotten them entirely. I was thinking of the older versions of demiliches (which were basically Awakened Demiliches in Pathfinder, only even more powerful). Aheh. Oops.
since most of the goal behind becoming a lich is immortality, I guess seeking immortality?
Good and evil aren't equal. Being good is about taking the hard road, evil is about taking the easy road. If being good was equal to evil, everyone would be good.
I'm pretty sure you could use a Wish spell to live a long time and perhaps be immortal, regardless of alignment.
since most of the goal behind becoming a lich is immortality, I guess seeking immortality?Good and evil aren't equal. Being good is about taking the hard road, evil is about taking the easy road. If being good was equal to evil, everyone would be good.
I'm pretty sure you could use a Wish spell to live a long time and perhaps be immortal, regardless of alignment.
Many immortal literary characters that would fall into the "Good" alignment category have also expressed the opinion that their immortality has been a curse rather than a blessing.
I'm a big fan of making immortality (outside of ascension to godhood) in my game worlds dependent upon the suffering of others, to ensure that any attempt to gain it will inevitably result in having to perform evil acts.
Two thoughts.
First, I think that OOTS had a good take on good characters dying.
Second, if I was running a campaign, and one of good players wanted to be "immortal", then they would have to go the Gandalf route.
They would have to have permission from their sponsor deity. First, the deity would chuckle at them for their immature understanding of immortality. But that deity would be patient, understanding that mortals are limited creatures.
That character would have to have a purpose for immortality greater than their own pleasure and power. Except for maybe Chaotic Good characters, LG and NG characters would have to have some sort of celestial oversight. CG characters might be required to lose a key part of themselves that essentially changed their personality.
The key is that striving for immortality would have to cost something for a good character and serve a purpose outside of themselves. Those two factors would place a different feel than the grasping, selfish motive typically ascribed to evil characters.
Gandalf really was the equivalent of a demi-god...
Gandalf really was the equivalent of a demi-god...
Yeah he really kind of was. Tolkien's wizards were more on the order of "wiseman who has supernatural origins" not unlike Merlin who was supposed to be the son of a demon.
No, I mean, Gandalf actually was the equivalent of a demi-god. He was one of the Maiar, a being of the same origin as the Valar, but lesser in power. The Valar were co-creators of the world along with Eru Iluvatar (God). While Eru was the Supreme Being, the Valar were the ones that sang the song of creation.
I would say Eru is the Supreme God (such as Lord Ao is in the Forgotten Realms), while the Valar are the Gods, and the Maiar are demi-gods. They aren't directly equal to Gods and Demi-Gods, but they are similar in many ways.
Sauron himself was also a Maiar. Gandalf, if I recall was even rumored to be the most powerful of the Maiar. He was not 'head of the order' because Sauron and Saruman were both better with words.
No, I mean, Gandalf actually was the equivalent of a demi-god. He was one of the Maiar, a being of the same origin as the Valar, but lesser in power. The Valar were co-creators of the world along with Eru Iluvatar (God). While Eru was the Supreme Being, the Valar were the ones that sang the song of creation.
I would say Eru is the Supreme God (such as Lord Ao is in the Forgotten Realms), while the Valar are the Gods, and the Maiar are demi-gods. They aren't directly equal to Gods and Demi-Gods, but they are similar in many ways.
Sauron himself was also a Maiar. Gandalf, if I recall was even rumored to be the most powerful of the Maiar. He was not 'head of the order' because Sauron and Saruman were both better with words.
Yes, I'm agreeing with you. But Tolkien did call them wizards and most likley drew his inspiration from the works of his day which often portrayed wizards as supernatural beings or at least dealing with them on a regular basis. Gandalf probably wasn't Maiar until after the Hobbit was published.
Yes, I'm agreeing with you. But Tolkien did call them wizards and most likley drew his inspiration from the works of his day which often portrayed wizards as supernatural beings or at least dealing with them on a regular basis. Gandalf probably wasn't Maiar until after the Hobbit was published.No, I mean, Gandalf actually was the equivalent of a demi-god. He was one of the Maiar, a being of the same origin as the Valar, but lesser in power. The Valar were co-creators of the world along with Eru Iluvatar (God). While Eru was the Supreme Being, the Valar were the ones that sang the song of creation.
I would say Eru is the Supreme God (such as Lord Ao is in the Forgotten Realms), while the Valar are the Gods, and the Maiar are demi-gods. They aren't directly equal to Gods and Demi-Gods, but they are similar in many ways.
Sauron himself was also a Maiar. Gandalf, if I recall was even rumored to be the most powerful of the Maiar. He was not 'head of the order' because Sauron and Saruman were both better with words.
It's possible, but he seemed have done some substantial world building even during the Hobbit. I think he knew Gandalf was more than just a Good Wizard in the Hobbit, but he may not have nailed down what exactly he was until Lord of the Rings.
Of the Five, only Gandalf kept true to his mission.By that, do you mean that the rest all turned traitor (like Saruman) or in general stopped caring/failed? Rhadagast (from the movie) didn't seem like a bad sort and certainly seemed involved in the current activities.
Actually...the version of the hobbit that I read didn't include Rhadagast OR any mention of a necromancer.... >.>'
Saruman eventually turned, Radagast was more concerned with the natural realm and the other two Wizards were never even named as far as I recall, nor were their colors revealed. I believe the traveled West and South and were never heard from again, at least in the context of the books.
I recall a mention of the Necromancer in the Hobbit, but I don't believe he was named as such, merely that Gandalf was called away and returned later after driving him off.
Monk of the Four Winds wold beg to differ (he CANNOT die..)
Everything dies ultimately. It only takes any of the following.
1. He dies before he reaches his capstone level, in that case it's off to the Boneyard like the rest. (very few people of any class make it to 10, let alone 20.)
2. Even with the capstone, any form of soul destruction will take care of that pesky reincarnation. Or if I simply trap you in an enternal prison that won't let you die.
A troll that manages to get fire and acid immunity cannot die.