RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
(stuff snipped to avoid text-walls)
Okay, a couple of things:
First, I'm not talking about how law/chaos and good/evil work in the real world, I'm talking about how they work in the Pathfinder system. I might well agree with you on all your stuff about Biblical and Socratic moral systems (I even wrote some papers about "Virtue Ethics" and "Utilitarianism" in college), but I'm not going to bother finding out, because it's irrelevant to this discussion.
Second, you don't seem to be paying much attention to what I'm saying, because a sizeable chunk of the wordcount you devoted to "correcting" me is in fact in 100% agreement with me.
I'm interested in further discussion, but only if it's about the Pathfinder alignment system and only if I'm being genuinely listened to. Feel free to go back and read my earlier post a bit more carefully and in its intended context, and respond afresh if you would like. If not, then I'll just go ahead and bow out of this dialogue for now. :)
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
I think when the person is attacking you, it's neutral, not evil.
For example, if Ksenia hits 7th level, she's going to have a mephit familiar. If they get attacked, she's going to go for slumber, and have the mephit use Coop DEEE Gracie. Now the last one standing (sleeping?) wouldn't get Koop Duh Grassed, but that's just economical. There's no difference between Puoc ed ecarg and 'death-by-fireball'.
Now if Ksena went into Erastil's home for wayward youngers and started letting her mephit go wild on sleeping orphans... that's evil.
You know what, nevermind. My post is effectively deleted as it isn't really needed.
Mmmmmmmmm beef.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The real problem with labeling a situation like this as evil is you're basically just making it impossible to have a paladin and anyone who casts save-or-suck spells in the same party. Wizards fight dirty. They're pretty much all about rendering enemies helpless until their melee pals can finish them off, and you really just have to accept that as accepted battlefield tactics for the sake of everyone's ability to have fun. Would you think it was wrong to kill someone if a spell had them stunned for a round? Magical sleep is the same effective deal if there's someone to kick them awake. The paladin I'm currently playing as prefers to have nice clean fair fights, and gets somewhat upset over these things, but it's more a matter of berating the rest of the party about showing a little class than feeling bad about exploiting a temporary status condition.
That said, going around on a coup de grace spree after literally everyone involved in the fight has been rendered sufficiently unconscious that there is no worry about them getting wake up (i.e. the rare instance where magical sleep hits every target and nobody's left to wake people up) there you might be on dubious moral ground, depending on the situation. It depends on whether killing things is what you're there to do, or if it's just something that ends up happening because you're in the wrong place at the wrong time. Villain of the week's henchmen up to no good? Go for it. Dryad who was flipping out at everyone because you started nailing a hammock to her tree? Might want to just leave a note of apology, and find a different place to camp for the night. Although again, there's a lot of other factors that may come into play there.
What if it was an evil baby?
If a paladin eats a baby, he has both broken his code and committed an evil action. He'll lose his powers, and probably also suffer an alignment shift away from LG.
More importantly, what alignment is the bread for the baby-sandwich? I mean, did that wheat get a chance to fight back, or was it “mowed down” while it just standing there?
And, of course, what we eat of the wheat is it's seeds, which means it’s BABY WHEAT!!!! Oh noooeeees!
Eating wheat is evil.
First, I'm not talking about how law/chaos and good/evil work in the real world, I'm talking about how they work in the Pathfinder system. I might well agree with you on all your stuff about Biblical and Socratic moral systems (I even wrote some papers about "Virtue Ethics" and "Utilitarianism" in college), but I'm not going to bother finding out, because it's irrelevant to this discussion.
Second, you don't seem to be paying much attention to what I'm saying, because a sizeable chunk of the wordcount you devoted to "correcting" me is in fact in 100% agreement with me.
I'm interested in further discussion, but only if it's about the Pathfinder alignment system and only if I'm being genuinely listened to. Feel free to go back and read my earlier post a bit more carefully and in its intended context, and respond afresh if you would like. If not, then I'll just go ahead and bow out of this dialogue for now. :)
Jiggy, you seem to be a smart guy and usually a decent poster. But as far as morality and ethics in gaming, there’s no use getting into any serious debates. There is no ‘right” answer other than “it’s only a game, so if you’re having fun….”. And, no matter how well reasoned your argument is, no one will change their mind. Ever. There are posters here that beleive eating meat is murder- and want to translate that modern morality into a medieval fantasy game.
These sorts of threads are hopeless. Sorry.
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
And, no matter how well reasoned your argument is, no one will change their mind. Ever.
Actually, that's not true. A matter of months ago, someone posted on the PFSOP forum that their character had received a notation of having committed an evil act. They described the situation (it did involve a CdG, and some other... awkward circumstances) and asked what others thought. The GM in question chimed in as well.
After hearing detailed descriptions of the event from both player and GM (thankfully they were on good terms and were able to agree on things), I explained in detail why I thought it wouldn't be evil (used an example involving a wizard, a magic missile, and a near-dead barbarian who couldn't get to you until next turn).
The GM changed his mind.
It is indeed rare (I myself was dumbfounded). But it does happen. And hey, what does it cost me to try? :)
Ok. But as long as you know, that in most cases, it’s a great deal like wrestling with a pig.
And, more times that I have seen someone change their mind, I have seen internet friends break up over something like this. So, there is something to lose.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It is indeed rare (I myself was dumbfounded). But it does happen. And hey, what does it cost me to try? :)
Hair follicles mostly...
(stuff snipped to avoid text-walls)Okay, a couple of things:
First, I'm not talking about how law/chaos and good/evil work in the real world, I'm talking about how they work in the Pathfinder system. I might well agree with you on all your stuff about Biblical and Socratic moral systems (I even wrote some papers about "Virtue Ethics" and "Utilitarianism" in college), but I'm not going to bother finding out, because it's irrelevant to this discussion.
Second, you don't seem to be paying much attention to what I'm saying, because a sizeable chunk of the wordcount you devoted to "correcting" me is in fact in 100% agreement with me.
I'm interested in further discussion, but only if it's about the Pathfinder alignment system and only if I'm being genuinely listened to. Feel free to go back and read my earlier post a bit more carefully and in its intended context, and respond afresh if you would like. If not, then I'll just go ahead and bow out of this dialogue for now. :)
I did hear what you were saying and i agree with up to a point, but not with paladins. For all other classes there are no extra rules on the good/evil axis because good and evil is not defined for those classes, it's not defined in the game with the exception of paladin. Good is however defined for the paladin. The code is not a code of order it's a system of "Morality". Most of the things listed in the code have nothing to do with order, and everything to do with morality (particulary a kantian sense of morality, which is very strict).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As a rule, I don't consider Coup de Graces as Evil. The rules are pretty quick to point the truly 'evil' things, and I think if the rules intended it as such, it would have been called out as such.
If an enemy attacks you, THAT is the moment you decide if the enemy is worthy of death. If it's 'wrong' to kill the bandit who is stabbing you with a sword... then it's NOT wrong to 'finish him off' as HE lays bleeding on the ground.
It's all mechanics. If I hit him for 10 points of damage... he's dies and it's ok. If I hit him for 8... he's lying on the ground bleeding to death. Why is stabbing him NOW to finish the job wrong... when 6 seconds ago it was fine?
I think people are WAYYYYYY to nitpicky about the term 'helpless'. Being held for 6 seconds is not helpless... Being disarmed is not helpless.
If this happened to YOUR character.... You'd be telling the DM that your drawing a boot dagger, or your friend is gonna dispell the hold, or your trying to whisper a stilled spell...
The battle is NOT over!!!! Never give up! Never Surrender!!!
But for some reason, everytime a villain drops his sword, he's now become a poster child for 'poor defensless civilian.'
Makes me think that a rogue who throws daggers is the PERFECT foil for any paladin. When it's his turn, he whips knives at the Paladin... when It's the paladins turn, his opponent is unarmed O.o
Now, the OP's original question?? That's a pretty gray area. Paladin comes around the hill and sees a few sleeping enemies... he Should see what's going on before the stabbing starts!
If he's in the middle of the fray, when they get sleeped?? keep stabbing!!!
|
Here is the original situation. Our contact lay on the ground beaten, the men who beat him are still present, taking some of his plants. A fire has been started and they are burning the rest of the plants. The oracle goes first, walks forward and puts out a fire. Bad guys turn. Oracle is surrounded and attacked. He takes a sizeable sum of damage. My turn. I cast sleep. All bad guys fail. One party member walks forward to coup de grace and i tell him not to worry, i got them and send him to put out the fire. They are going to die, if not by my hand then somone else in the party. I think to myself, well might as not waste this situation and i kill them in the name of zon kuthon. If i didnt do the killing another party member would have, so i didnt go out of my way to hunt the people down. Later it was deemed an evil act. Hence my question about the coup de grace being evil in the first place.
Here is the original situation. Our contact lay on the ground beaten, the men who beat him are still present, taking some of his plants. A fire has been started and they are burning the rest of the plants. The oracle goes first, walks forward and puts out a fire. Bad guys turn. Oracle is surrounded and attacked. He takes a sizeable sum of damage. My turn. I cast sleep. All bad guys fail. One party member walks forward to coup de grace and i tell him not to worry, i got them and send him to put out the fire. They are going to die, if not by my hand then somone else in the party. I think to myself, well might as not waste this situation and i kill them in the name of zon kuthon. If i didnt do the killing another party member would have, so i didnt go out of my way to hunt the people down. Later it was deemed an evil act. Hence my question about the coup de grace being evil in the first place.
Nope, not evil. Now, sure, it's not "Exalted", but not Evil in any way shape or form.
I think to myself, well might as not waste this situation and i kill them in the name of zon kuthon. If i didnt do the killing another party member would have, so i didnt go out of my way to hunt the people down. Later it was deemed an evil act. Hence my question about the coup de grace being evil in the first place.
Honestly.... Zon-Kuthon is like sadistic Evil. If I were DM and you wanted to hand a puppy to an orphan 'in the name of ZonKuthon' I'd probably consider it an evil act ;)
I don't think it's the killing of enemies that's evil, it's the active worship of Evil that hit ya there...
Though frankly I'd have a hard time seeing why it would matter? As a follower of Evil god of death destruction and pain... This shouldn't be a surprise.
Having read Nightglass based on followers of him, There seems to be.... no redeemable qualities to the religion.
I'll say that out of all the sacrifices sent to him.... THESE probably earned it the most... but that still doesn't make giving him blood a 'good' act ;)
If it wasn't Evil to hack them to death with an axe in a bloody and wanton display of carnage involving much pain, suffering, and splatterings of gore while they were walking about then it's similarly not Evil to give them a quick and relaitively painless end while they are napping.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Honestly.... Zon-Kuthon is like sadistic Evil. If I were DM and you wanted to hand a puppy to an orphan 'in the name of ZonKuthon' I'd probably consider it an evil act ;)
Because Zon knows the Orphan can't feed himself, let alone the puppy, and the Orphan would have the choice of letting the puppy starve (and feel the torn guilt) or fruitlessly try to keep both their heads above water and simply prolong the suffering. Well played Priest of Zon, well played.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If it wasn't Evil to hack them to death with an axe in a bloody and wanton display of carnage involving much pain, suffering, and splatterings of gore while they were walking about then it's similarly not Evil to give them a quick and relaitively painless end while they are napping.
Apples and Oranges. As much as the OP wants to make that the comparison, it isn't. The real comparison is between a quick, relatively painless death at the hands of one party member, or the quick, relatively painless sacrifice of a soul to an Evil deity at the hands of another. One is clearly Evil, the other isn't.
A coup de grace is no more inherently evil than a climb check.
What if it was an evil baby?
If a paladin eats a baby, he has both broken his code and committed an evil action. He'll lose his powers, and probably also suffer an alignment shift away from LG.
Then the parents were negligent in shaving off its goatee.
Nope, not evil. Now, sure, it's not "Exalted", but not Evil in any way shape or form.I'm genuinely curious why you think not.
Our VC was very adamant that sacrificing a living, intelligent, sentient being to an evil god was inherently an evil act.
Well, you're already evil. But it's like watching a train wreck and saying "I give those souls to Nylarthotep!", doesn't count as they were going to be dead anyway.
In other words, your VC is correct, but you weren't "sacrificing" them. Just muttering some meaningless words as you helped you party kill them anyway.
The character in question isn't evil, though. This took place in a PFS game.
Generally speaking, the types of people usually involved in making sacrifices are the types of people that scenarios are usually designed around to put a stop to.
How is someone a worshipper of a Evil deity without being evil?
Nor was he actually "making a sacrifice" just muttering some meaningless words as foes were killed.
How is someone a worshipper of a Evil deity without being evil?The character in question isn't evil, though. This took place in a PFS game.
Generally speaking, the types of people usually involved in making sacrifices are the types of people that scenarios are usually designed around to put a stop to.
They're a member of the REFORMED church of writhing tentacle monsters.
Haven't read this too closely, so it may have been mentioned.
In my mind the existence of a verifiable existent afterlife really skews the morality of killing. It pushes a lot of edge cases closer.
When there's a certain amount of doubt whether showing mercy is appropriate in the context of achieving larger goals, "Kill them and let God sort them out" is a lot less objectionable when you know the sentiment has a factually accurate basis.
He is within one alignment step of evil, ie neutral.
Muttering "meaningless" words such as "I make this sacrifice in your name" while slitting someone's throat doesn't count as a sacrifice in your eyes?
What does?
In the context of this universe killing someone in a god's name is different than sacrificing them to that god.
The latter case is significantly more difficult to pull off and is usually a lot more involved.
The first case the soul goes to it's natural reward. The second it goes to the god the sacrificer forces it to. This didn't happen in the given scenario.
He is within one alignment step of evil, ie neutral.
Muttering "meaningless" words such as "I make this sacrifice in your name" while slitting someone's throat doesn't count as a sacrifice in your eyes?
What does?
The idea of 'giving his soul to Zon-kuthon' SHOULD require more then lip service. Zon gets the pleasure of watching you kill a guy... but his soul would still be judged by pharasma and go where it should.
I'm sure some high priest with a fancy ritual can actually GIVE souls to his god... but I don't think a 'battlefield sacrifice' would count.
However...
The PC obviously thinks that he IS serving his god in this fashion. His EVIL god.
The PLAYER may be neutral... but the CHURCH is Evil. As are the rites and sacrifices and everything else about it. You can be neutral, and still do EVIL things... but being Neutral doesn't make sacrificing to Evil things... neutral acts.
Seriously... Check out his 'holy text'
The god’s holy text is Umbral Leaves, written by a mad prophet. Each of these volumes is bound in human skin, sometimes removed in a single piece from a victim’s head so that the face is on the front cover. In some copies, each page is itself a rustling sheet of dried skin, and the text is written in human blood.
He's basically Pinhead walking around with a necromican. It's REALLLLLLLY hard to justify 'active' worship and claim neutrality.
It could be DONE.... but you would be a.... less than devoted worshiper who tended to shun the actual 'evil' that the church requires.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If someone made an offering to Zon Kathon and then coup de graced I would revoke their powers.
You finished them off QUICKLY. You didn't savor the moment, they passed quietly, in their sleep, without any pain and completely lacking in the terror of the nihlistic void ahead of them. Did you learn NOTHING in church? I think you need a refresher course...someone get me a rack and the cat of 9 tails, and a bag of figs stat.
He is within one alignment step of evil, ie neutral.
Muttering "meaningless" words such as "I make this sacrifice in your name" while slitting someone's throat doesn't count as a sacrifice in your eyes?
What does?
If the Paladin yells “Die in the Name of Iomedae’ every time he smites, are those souls sacrificed to Iomedae?
Historically, human sacrifice required considerable ritual to go along with it. Incense, a special altar, a special knife, a ordained priest, certain victims on certain holy days, and so forth.
Clearly none of that happened, thus no "sacrifice".
|
If the Paladin yells “Die in the Name of Iomedae’ every time he smites, are those souls sacrificed to Iomedae?
No, they were smited (smote? smitten?) in the name of Iomedae. Not sacrificed. Both acts result in someone dying at the hands of someone else, but the purpose behind each act is wholly different.
The target of the smite is an evil creature that has done evil and will continue to do evil, and a paladin choosing said creature as the target of a smite is removing that creature from the world so that it may no longer do evil things.
Likewise a hellknight choosing a good creature as the target of a smite is removing that creature from the world because it has done good and will continue to do good until stopped.
Sacrificing a creature to an evil deity is furthering the progress of evil. Making an offering to a good deity is furthering the progress of good.
The areas in between are reserved for roleplay. Delivering a coup de grace to a helpless enemy? YMMV.
Likewise a hellknight choosing a good creature as the target of a smite is removing that creature from the world because it has done good and will continue to do good until stopped.
Hellknights don't smite creatures because they're good, they smite them because they're chaotic.
Otherwise, carry on with the conversation.
Ok there are three issues here:
1. Is doing a coup on foes an evil act? Well, since they obviously want to kill you too, and thus not killing them would endanger your life (and that of others), then certainly no, it’s not evil.
2. Is this really a “sacrifice”? Thoughts differ, and depends heavily on what is meant by a “sacrifice”. Certainly the evil intent is there, even if the act is performed in such a way that it is otherwise meaningless. Maybe.
3. Is the OP being a “richard’ and trying to slide thru a evil PC by calling him “neutral”? Yes. Per James Jacobs, worshipers of Zon-Kunthon are evil. So, even tho the Op gets a pass on #1, and a “maybe” on #2, he’s clearly dead wrong on #3. OP, your DM was right, you’re wrong. You’re evil and you’re outta there.
|
|
Ok there are three issues here:
3. Is the OP being a “richard’ and trying to slide thru a evil PC by calling him “neutral”? Yes. Per James Jacobs, worshipers of Zon-Kunthon are evil. So, even tho the Op gets a pass on #1, and a “maybe” on #2, he’s clearly dead wrong on #3. OP, your DM was right, you’re wrong. You’re evil and you’re outta there.
If number 3 was true and constant, there would not be a Cheliax faction in pathfinder society. Thier nation are devil summoning, Asmodeus worshipers. Not all of them mind you, but a good majority of them are, as Asmodeus is the nations patron deity. The factions leader is evil (yes its not a player character and thus not bound by the no evil rule). Asmodeus is evil, the same alignment as Zon. So following your statement, no chelaxian can join the pathfinder society as they worship an evil diety... Which you cant do if your not evil (following your statement).
You can be neutral and worship an evil deity, unless there is a hidden rule where asmodeus is the only exception.
This will be the 3rd time ive said this. I was told that it was an evil act (once the adventure was over so without a time machine actions could not be changed). I have gone with that ruling. The question is, whether a normal coup de grace would be evil if i did it, with 0 pretense of sacrifice. If me worshiping zon would make every act of coup de grace evil because it could be seen as a sacrifice.
|
|
The question is, whether a normal coup de grace would be evil if i did it, with 0 pretense of sacrifice.
You already have an answer. The majority of the responses have been that performing a coup de grace is not evil. And that wasn't at issue in our game, either.
If me worshiping zon would make every act of coup de grace evil because it could be seen as a sacrifice.
Not equal statements.
If number 3 was true and constant, there would not be a Cheliax faction in pathfinder society. Thier nation are devil summoning, Asmodeus worshipers. Not all of them mind you, but a good majority of them are, as Asmodeus is the nations patron deity. The factions leader is evil (yes its not a player character and thus not bound by the no evil rule). Asmodeus is evil, the same alignment as Zon. So following your statement, no chelaxian can join the pathfinder society as they worship an evil diety... Which you cant do if your not evil (following your statement).
You can be neutral and worship an evil deity, unless there is a hidden rule where asmodeus is the only exception.
Asmodeus has a lot of followers interested in 'law' and 'contracts' and things like that. Most of the average people in cheliax don't commit sacrifices or summon devils... the GOVERNMENT does... but the average citizen could get away with being neutral. Claiming Asmodeus isn't THAT bad because at least the trains run on time...
IF they claim anything at all.... Just because there is an 'official deity' does not mean the citizens 'worship' per se... Many just shut up, and hope nobody notices. Same with Zon in Nidal.
not EVERYONE is a fanatic torturer... Many just hide inside at night, and hope the true fanatics never notice them.
What is the 'non-evil' appeal of Zon-Kuthon? God of pain, suffering and torture?
This will be the 3rd time ive said this. I was told that it was an evil act (once the adventure was over so without a time machine actions could not be changed). I have gone with that ruling. The question is, whether a normal coup de grace would be evil if i did it, with 0 pretense of sacrifice. If me worshiping zon would make every act of coup de grace evil because it could be seen as a sacrifice.
General consensus seems to be... it depends. Most do not think that a simple Coup De Grace would be evil in itself. Also, worshiping Zon would not make EVERY coup de grace evil.... UNLESS you claim it is a sacrifice for you evil deity. Killing a guy.... 'ok-ish.' Killing a guy 'for Zon-Kuthon'? Evil.
|
|
You already have an answer. The majority of the responses have been that performing a coup de grace is not evil. And that wasn't at issue in our game, either.
Yes, i get that it wasnt the issue in our game. Im just covering my ass for the future. I didnt think it evil at the time because they were on death's door anyway. This was not the case and for the future, i will not be doing that.
Ok there are three issues here:
3. Is the OP being a “richard’ and trying to slide thru a evil PC by calling him “neutral”? Yes. Per James Jacobs, worshipers of Zon-Kunthon are evil. So, even tho the Op gets a pass on #1, and a “maybe” on #2, he’s clearly dead wrong on #3. OP, your DM was right, you’re wrong. You’re evil and you’re outta there.
If number 3 was true and constant, there would not be a Cheliax faction in pathfinder society. Thier nation are devil summoning, Asmodeus worshipers. Not all of them mind you, but a good majority of them are, as Asmodeus is the nations patron deity. The factions leader is evil (yes its not a player character and thus not bound by the no evil rule). Asmodeus is evil, the same alignment as Zon. So following your statement, no chelaxian can join the pathfinder society as they worship an evil diety... Which you cant do if your not evil (following your statement).
You can be neutral and worship an evil deity, unless there is a hidden rule where asmodeus is the only exception.
However, like I said= Per James Jacobs, worshipers of Zon-Kunthon are evil. Note that he didn’t say anyone who worshipped any evil deity was evil. Once you pass beyond mere “lip service” you are evil.
Your PC is thus evil.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
However, like I said= Per James Jacobs, worshipers of Zon-Kunthon are evil. Note that he didn’t say anyone who worshipped any evil deity was evil. Once you pass beyond mere “lip service” you are evil.
Your PC is thus evil.
Actually, James said
You can't be a neutral worshiper of Zon-Kuthon. You can certainly give lip service to him, but the more you actually worship a deity (and by extension, the more you actually follow that deity's teachings and do what you're supposed to do in order to actually perform the acts of worship in the first place), the more your alignment shifts to near that deity.
And he also added just after
To be actually qualified as a worshiper of Zon-Kunthon, you'll need to be lawful evil, or maybe lawful neutral or neutral evil.
Last time I checked, lawful neutral is not evil.
And my guess is that when James wrote "no neutral worshipper", he meant "no true neutral worshipper".