It is amazing to see how quickly a PC can become a bloodthirsty murderer when faced with taking a -4 to hit in order to deal nonlethal damage.
I think your being a little extreme to be honest. I've seen people complain that your not being moral enough by not killing people.
|
It is amazing to see how quickly a PC can become a bloodthirsty murderer when faced with taking a -4 to hit in order to deal nonlethal damage.
-Matt
Truly, it would be better if more Pathfinders understood the ideals of the Sun Spirit, and learn to use their weapon as a blade of mercy, not a tool of death. But they tell me I'm the one who's an ignorant savage...
|
I actually bought "Faiths of Purity" because of the mention of paladin codes in there, as I'm always looking for more fluff for my paldin of Iomedae.
The codes are quite interesting when it comes to this discussion, especially concerning killing NPCs you have subdued.
The relevant parts are:
*Iomedae: When in doubt, I may force my enemies to surrender, but I am responsible for their lives.
*Sarenrae: I will show the less fortunate the light of the
Dawnflower. I will live my life as her mortal blade, shining with the light of truth. AND I will redeem the ignorant with my words and my actions. If they will not turn toward the light, I will redeem them by the sword.
*Shelyn: I accept surrender if my opponent can be redeemed—and I never assume that they cannot be. All things that live love beauty, and I will show beauty’s answer to them.
*Torag: Against my people's enemies I will show no mercy. I will not allow their surrender, except to extract information. I will defeat them, and I will scatter their families. Yet even in the struggle against our enemies, I will act in a way that brings honor to Torag.
Erastil's code doesn't say anything related to this.
But yeah, it is quite different between the different gods. And even in the stricktest case (Torag) it's only when they are "my people's enemies" which in most cases would mean the enemies of the dwarven race, I guess, but could apply in smaller scale as well.
And while this only applies to paladins, I think other worshippers of these faiths might have similar views. For example, earlier in the book, in Sarenrae's section it says: "Unless someone has shown himself to be irretrievably evil, your faith demands that you treat him with the kindness you would show to anyone who had lost his way. Redemption is rarely a swift process, and your faith demands the patience to hold your temper and help others to walk the righteous path."
There is of course the problem that not all good characters worship a deity, so these moral guidelines cannot be used by all of them.
|
Hypothetical example. A fight has broken out where a civilian is with the enemy opponents. The civilian has not attacked any member of the party but they were travelling with the enemies. The fight is over, but our psycho pathfinder has suddenly executed the civilian in cold blood in front of the party. Everyone goes "Woah! What!?"
So what do you do as a player when a fellow Pathfinder turns out to be a Psycho?
1. Get the gaze of the GM and raise an eyebrow as if to say: "Really?" See what the GM does next.
2. If nothing, roleplay your character admonishing the Psycho: "They were a non-combatant, and even worse, they were a non-combatant that likely had information we needed to do our mission! You sir, are no Pathfinder. Pathfinders cooperate!"
3. Hear out the psycho. Generally this will be crap like: "I was raised to hate villagers and merchants! It's him or me! He was coming right at me! I was in rage!"
4. If the psycho has a decent reason, drop it. If not...
5. "You are no Pathfinder. I will not fight alongside a blood-hungry coward. I vote we kick this disruptive, non-cooperative murderer from the squad. All in agreement, raise your right gauntlet."
6. If the party kicks the psycho, the player goes home, likely with either 0 exp or 1 exp and lower gold on their chronicle. They might even leave without their prestige point. It hits the psycho where it hurts the most.
If the party does not kick the psycho, speak no more of it.
"We have a job to do, and we must focus our efforts on the mission."
This method should punish psychopathic Pathfinders even when you have a relatively inexperienced GM. Often it's hard for the GM to admonish someone for alignment infractions if they fear the rest of the table might turn against them.
|
This is why I have a paladin of Torag.
*Torag: Against my people's enemies I will show no mercy. I will not allow their surrender, except to extract information. I will defeat them, and I will scatter their families. Yet even in the struggle against our enemies, I will act in a way that brings honor to Torag.
THIS RIGHT HERE.
Ahem, excuse me while I go torch a village in my god's name now. >.>
|
Hypothetical example. A fight has broken out where a civilian is with the enemy opponents. The civilian has not attacked any member of the party but they were travelling with the enemies. The fight is over, but our psycho pathfinder has suddenly executed the civilian in cold blood in front of the party. Everyone goes "Woah! What!?"
So what do you do as a player when a fellow Pathfinder turns out to be a Psycho?
1. Get the gaze of the GM and raise an eyebrow as if to say: "Really?" See what the GM does next.
2. If nothing, roleplay your character admonishing the Psycho: "They were a non-combatant, and even worse, they were a non-combatant that likely had information we needed to do our mission! You sir, are no Pathfinder. Pathfinders cooperate!"
3. Hear out the psycho. Generally this will be crap like: "I was raised to hate villagers and merchants! It's him or me! He was coming right at me! I was in rage!"
4. If the psycho has a decent reason, drop it. If not...
5. "You are no Pathfinder. I will not fight alongside a blood-hungry coward. I vote we kick this disruptive, non-cooperative murderer from the squad. All in agreement, raise your right gauntlet."
6. If the party kicks the psycho, the player goes home, likely with either 0 exp or 1 exp and lower gold on their chronicle. They might even leave without their prestige point. It hits the psycho where it hurts the most.
If the party does not kick the psycho, speak no more of it.
"We have a job to do, and we must focus our efforts on the mission."This method should punish psychopathic Pathfinders even when you have a relatively inexperienced GM. Often it's hard for the GM to admonish someone for alignment infractions if they fear the rest of the table might turn against them.
The problem with that is it that it leaves a bad taste in the player's mouth when he was trying to play out his character, he just didn't consider what the consequences might be in the heat of the moment, and the damage is already done so it can't really be undone (unless retconned).
Need to distinguish what happens to the player as well as the character (as well as the remainder of the party, who'd be one party member down).
|
|
The problem with that is it that it leaves a bad taste in the player's mouth when he was trying to play out his character, he just didn't consider what the consequences might be in the heat of the moment, and the damage is already...
If a player's idea of playing their character is running around killing civilians, it's possible Pathfinder Society isn't the game for that character... Sad but true. The organisation just wouldn't support these kind of loose cannons.
If the party hasn't got the numbers to kick someone, at the end of the mission the Psycho should get a strike on their faction sheet for an alignment infraction.
So long as he got a warning about it before hand. The civilian may not have been recognizable as a civilian in that scenario, and may have been taken for another enemy. In any case a warning really helps to know when something's a little much for the table.
|
|
Which PFS scenario had the CN orc?
Also, screw that cleric and magus.
Echoes of the Everwar 1. Heh, I was thinking of saying that "people who kill orcs for being orcs make Mikaze cry" because I thought of it at the table, but then I decided no one else there probably had heard of you. I can only go off what the GM told us, so maybe he wasn't CN, and he was most certainly a crazy addled cannibal (but he didn't kill any of those people in the first place, the corpses were just lying there and he had no other food around, so seriously, cut the guy some slack; he even offered us some if we wanted).
|
|
The problem with that is it that it leaves a bad taste in the player's mouth when he was trying to play out his character, he just didn't consider what the consequences might be in the heat of the moment, and the damage is already...If a player's idea of playing their character is running around killing civilians, it's possible Pathfinder Society isn't the game for that character... Sad but true. The organisation just wouldn't support these kind of loose cannons.
If the party hasn't got the numbers to kick someone, at the end of the mission the Psycho should get a strike on their faction sheet for an alignment infraction.
True, but the problem isn't that that they want to keep doing it, it's that they can't go back and change their actions, and the player usually gets a bleaker view of the whole game over it.
|
|
Thanks! I'll check it out!
And yeah, I don't envy being in the position you guys were forced into. It's something I've been wondering about lately, after getting pulled into a PFS game at this year's Gencon.
It depends highly on the table. In the Shattered Star game I'm playing, even you might be impressed by how many things the group has managed to not kill.
In PFS, even my half-orc barbarian always strikes for nonlethal damage except against undead or anything a "sun shaman" or "moon shaman" tells him is an evil outsider. He doesn't want to end anyone else's story in a footnote to his own, so he is extremely reverent of those who do wind up dying by the hands of his "tribe". Some players will kill people more than others. The guy playing the cleric also blew up a room full of dervishes and now has a handwritten boon on his chronicle that basically says he can't enter Qadira without being tried for the murder (and the other PCs got a boon that they were deputized to extradite him, but they won't do it due to Explore Report Cooperate).
|
|
It depends highly on the table. In the Shattered Star game I'm playing, even you might be impressed by how many things the group has managed to not kill. ** spoiler omitted ** Our Kingmaker group is also pretty redeemy.
Oh man I know about Shattered Star. That spoiler is one of many many reasons I'm excited about running it when we finish Jade Regent.
Really love hearing about players pursuing those particular hooks. :D
In PFS, even my half-orc barbarian always strikes for nonlethal damage except against undead or anything a "sun shaman" or "moon shaman" tells him is an evil outsider. He doesn't want to end anyone else's story in a footnote to his own, so he is extremely reverent of those who do wind up dying by the hands of his "tribe".
Hey, this guy sounds alright!
|
|
It depends highly on the table. In the Shattered Star game I'm playing, even you might be impressed by how many things the group has managed to not kill. ** spoiler omitted ** Our Kingmaker group is also pretty redeemy.Oh man I know about Shattered Star. That spoiler is one of many many reasons I'm excited about running it when we finish Jade Regent.
Really love hearing about players pursuing those particular hooks. :D
I'm in Part 4 now and we just
|
|
In PFS, even my half-orc barbarian always strikes for nonlethal damage except against undead or anything a "sun shaman" or "moon shaman" tells him is an evil outsider. He doesn't want to end anyone else's story in a footnote to his own, so he is extremely reverent of those who do wind up dying by the hands of his "tribe".Hey, this guy sounds alright!
I am called Memory of Dreams, for I memorize the names and dreams of each story that has ended so that mine can continue. To them, their death was the capstone to their whole story, so how can I let it simply be a passing mention in my own that I quickly forget until it fades away. Every name will be remembered, and if they have a bit of their story untold, a dream that is not wholly evil that they have yet to fulfill, I will try to fulfill it. I take that part of them into me when I take responsibility for their end.
|
"All that Good requires to succeed is for Evil men to do nothing. Encourage the sinful to practice Sloth"
Without broadening this argument out in the real world, exactly what is Good and Evil in the Pathfinder universe?
Typically in an adventure, expecially any adventure that includes combat, there are several types of creatures you might encouter:
Pathfinder PCs
Good or Neutral NPCs
BBEGs - Big Bad Evil Guys, which often includes Evil Pathfinder NPCs
Mooks - Lots of little evil "Monsters or other kreatures" :)
Innocent bystanders
Victims
Not an exhaustive list, but enough to illustrate the point.
There are also several types of interactions you can have with these creatures:
Destroy or kill them (same difference).
Save them from something that could kill or destroy them.
Talk to them and get information (Bluff, Diplomacize, Intimidate).
Talk to them to get goods and services.
Help them.
Hinder them.
Heal them.
Harm them.
It is Good to destroy, hinder or harm Evil.
It is Evil to destroy, hinder or harm or anything not Evil.
It is Good to help, heal or save anything not Evil.
It is Neutral to help, heal or save Evil.
Helping, healing and saving are Good acts, but not when they help Evil, so it comes out Neutral.
It is Neutral to not destroy, hinder or harm Evil.
It is Neutral to not destroy hinder or harm Good.
It is Neutral to not help, heal, or save Evil.
It is Neutral to not help, heal, or save Evil.
It is not Evil to do nothing, but it is not Good either.
Diplomacy is Good.
Bluff is Neutral.
Intimidate is Neutral, unless it involves harm, then it is Evil.
Acquiring goods and services for money or barter is Neutral.
Non-lethal damage is not harm, and is therefor not Evil, but it's not Good either, unless you do it to Evil creatures.
Intentionally doing Evil things is a serious alignment infraction for Good or Neutral Character. Enough to cause the loss of Paladin, Cleric, or other faith based powers until some kind of Atonement is made.
Accidentally or unintentionally doing Evil is still Evil, but if you balance it by doing something Good, it comes out Neutral. So if you saved the village, but innocent bystanders were killed by your fireball in the process, then that's a Neutral combo. If your character does Evil acts under the influence of an Evil NPC, then that is also unintentional Evil. I would apply the "Rule of Three" here and say it takes 3 unintentional Evil acts with no balancing Good acts to redeem your character to equal one intentional Evil act for the purposes of Alignment drift.
So going by this code, we can affirm that torture, defined as "Intimidation to obtain information that involves harming the subject creature", is indeed Evil.
We can also affirm that destroying undead or any other Evil creature is Good, and that killing innocent bystanders, victims, or non-Evil NPCs is Evil, especially if you do it on purpose. All you Paladin types out there should be checking alignments before you start a fight.
This code allows for the possibility of accidental alignment changes. You could have a character so inept that not only does he routinely accidentally kill innocent bystanders, but he also doesn't manage to kill the monster in the process. The road to Hell is paved by people like this.
As an Chaotic Neutral character, Jimbo doesn't really care too much about Good and Evil, not does he care for rules. He carries a whole arsenal of weapons, both lethal and non-lethal and is equally well-versed with both. No -4 penalty to make him "bloodthirsty".
The decision to do non-lethal damage is mostly a choice made by whether there might be some information to be gotten out of a surviving prisoner, or by whether the creature might be controlled by an Evil creature, but not necessarily be Evil themselves.
Sometimes he just likes to show off by beating the supposedly lethal enemy into unconsciousness just to prove that
"Sticks and stones will break you bones."
|
|
As your GM for this event, I can explain. The enemies you speak of were insane as a result of some really awful things that had been done to them, but they could be cured. Killing them off when they could be healed of their mental afflictions is fairly evil, especially considering that they are dealing about 1d2 to a level 5 party. Also, it was statistically impossible for them to hit your character, as I recall.
Nah. They actually hit beard guy a few times. I think he was the only one they did hit. In any case, I'm actually talking about a scenario I participated in with a different group. The DM of which I speak, who shall remain anonymous to avoid stepping on any toes, decided it was inappropriate to kill these creatures. The problem was that while they could deal very little damage, they kept trying to grapple and hold you still for other stuff to beat the crap out of you.
In any case their argument was that because the creatures are partially bound, it is an evil act to terminate them despite the obvious danger. This was also another instance where it was a potentially curable ailment. However A.) the group had only one person with the ability to perform heal checks and B.) we were all (besides that one person) dumb brute fighter types. Ergo, our characters would not be capable of discerning the fact that they could have been cured. Moreover, the person that COULD have figured this out chose not to inform the party of anything at all.
Despite these facts, we were threatened with alignment infractions. We wound up having to just sit there and get the crap beat out of us and get grapple attempt spammed. Oh, best part? Taking attacks of opportunity against them would also have gotten us an alignment infraction if we accidentally killed one. It seems awfully silly to me that characters with no conceivable way to know they could be treated, that are in a fight very much carrying the risk of swift death, would be penalized for doing what they could to save themselves. Especially when they genuinely don't know any better.
|
|
... What about a planar bound angel forced to block the PC's entrance? It's not coming back in the celestial realms if you kill it here...
Moral of that story comes in two parts: 1. Always TRY to act your alignment. 2. The VC from DC is effing cool.
|
|
One of the features of Living Greyhawk that I miss was the many regions that developed a legal code that identified unlawful behavior, including penalties and rules for softer sentencing based on PC skills/roleplay. I always loved that it was illegal to harm a horse in Ket, but you could kill elves as if they were monsters.
Would it be so arduous to develop a PFS legal code for Absalom and the five original Faction nations? Would defining crime & punishment in PFS lead to more problems at the table, or would it dampen some of the situations we've been talking about?
Doug, I like this. I think the concept itself is worthy of a thread of its own for discussion, especially since it's not been picked up here. After all, we are supposed to be non-evil.
|
|
Doug, I like this. I think the concept itself is worthy of a thread of its own for discussion, especially since it's not been picked up here. After all, we are supposed to be non-evil.One of the features of Living Greyhawk that I miss was the many regions that developed a legal code that identified unlawful behavior, including penalties and rules for softer sentencing based on PC skills/roleplay. I always loved that it was illegal to harm a horse in Ket, but you could kill elves as if they were monsters.
Would it be so arduous to develop a PFS legal code for Absalom and the five original Faction nations? Would defining crime & punishment in PFS lead to more problems at the table, or would it dampen some of the situations we've been talking about?
Now you're on the wrong track. Law and Good are not the same. Plenty of Evil acts are Lawful, many Good acts are Chaotic (Unlawful). Breaking the Law doesn't make you Evil. Obeying the Law doesn't make you Good. Pathfinders are supposed to be non-Evil, but they are not required to be Law-abiding. There IS a difference.
Then there is the fact that Absalom and the 5 original faction nations are 6 different governments, so you would need 6 different legal codes. For instance, I am pretty sure that slavery is legal in some faction nations and illegal in others. So the answer to your questions is "Yes, it would be exceedingly arduous to develop a PFS legal code(s) for Absalom and the five orignal faction nations."
On the other hand, there should be (and is) an alignment code for the Pathfinder Society. If you go around torturing creatures and killing innocent by-standers on purpose, then you should get kicked out of the Society. Player's who regulary participate in these types of actions should have their character's Chronicle sheet marked "Evil", and that character should be prevented from gaining any more XP or PP in sactioned PFS play.
Now, if you really want to talk about Law and Chaos and the minute differences in the legal codes of Andora and Cheliax, instead of Good and Evil, I am pretty sure that there's a dissertation on that lurking in my brain as well.
|
|
So are there alignment infractions only for acting evil, or can you get it for any behavior outside your character's alignment? I have a character that I want to have eventually grow and change as a person, including an alignment change that doesn't involve evil. Can I insist that the GM give me an alignment warning on a chronicle when I first start acting against the starting alignment?
|
|
I certainly think that would be appropriate, but changing from Lawful to Neutral to Chaotic is going to require a lot of mis-behaving on your part without being actively Evil while doing it. Practical jokes anyone?.
Or, are you planning on dipping your CN barb into a LG pally? ;)
Also, you have to make a point to let the GM know that your character is violating his alignment on purpose, and you will have to make sure the GM notes it on your Chronicle, like
Doesn't work or play well with others.
Displays agressive Chaotic tendencies.
Colorsprays outside the box.
or
Listens and follows orders well.
Looks both ways before crossing dangerous dungeon corridors.
Is trustworthy, loyal, helpful, friendly, courteous, kind, obedient, cheerful, thifty, clean, brave and reverent.
|
Alignment "discussions" are largely pointless since most use their own views on morality, law, etc. as a basis for deciding what is what in the fantasy game. In many cases, that is a bad basis for comparison. Alignment is heavily influenced by a player's experiences with religion, education, parenting units (or lack thereof), literary experience, etc. Hell, if we cannot agree on the equivalent in-game alignment of many of the most iconic figures (looking at you Batman), what makes us think we can agree on the mostly minor conflicts that occur in PFS?
PvP, even nonlethal PvP, isn't allowed
Just to be nit-picky, even PvP in PFS is unclear. The only thing it specifically references is killing a fellow character.
The goal of Pathfinder Society Organized Play is to provide an enjoyable experience for as many players as possible. Player-versus-player conflict only sours a session. While killing another character might seem like fun to you, it certainly won’t be for the other character’s player. Even if you feel that killing another PC is in character for your PC at this particular moment, just figure out some other way for your character to express herself. In short, you can never voluntarily use your character to kill another character—ever*. Note that this does not apply to situations where your character is mind-controlled by an NPC and is forced by that NPC to attack a fellow Pathfinder.
Note that it does not talk about casting spells, attacking, or otherwise entering into a physical confrontation with another character, lethal or otherwise. PvP is a general term that we liberally apply to any player conflicts, but technically, that perspective is not supported by the rules. Of course, this interpretation will likely get you labeled at least a disruptive player, if not a "jerk," so proceed with caution. :-)
RPG Superstar 2014 Top 32
|
Isn't there a faction mission in one of the scenarios where you have to
** spoiler omitted **
?
You'd think that would count as an evil act. PFS is weird.
Not necessarily evil. It's implied that he's done some nasty things, and in Golarion, all it takes is a Regeneration spell to grow a tongue back.
|
|
You'd think that would count as an evil act
Perhaps, but campaign leadership has decided that the onus of alignment issues fall on the faction head for assigning you said mission. Within the scope of PFS, "just following orders" is a valid defense. An average character need not worry about evil acts when performing their faction missions. That exemption does not, however, apply to paladins or other characters with an extremely narrow margin for immoral actions.
|
RPG Superstar 2014 Top 32
|
all it takes is a Regeneration spell to grow a tongue back.Um, not really a good example. I could say the same about murder. Afterall, there is raise dead so why worry about something as trivial as death?
Raise Dead is a bit harder to get. Negative levels, more expensive, etc. Regeneration is well within the budget of practically anybody.
|
|
Evil CAN be defined in purely game terms. See my previous attempt at this in the thread above, about 16 posts back. It is not dependent on the players or the GMs sensibilities, religious upbringing, etc, etc, etc, nor is it dependent on the characters background, or even on their Alignment. Killing or harming non-evil creatures is Evil. The Evil character doesn't think that killing is Good, or he wouldn't do it, because he doesn't want to do Good things, he wants to do Evil things. Likewise, an Evil creature won't want to kill or harm Evil creatures because that would be doing Good.
An Evil act is still Evil even if you were ordered to do it, or coerced into, or did it while under the influence of an Evil spell. The "I was just following orders" defense means your were Lawful, not that you were Good, or even Neutral.
Do enough Evil faction missions without some compensating Good actions, and your character should become Evil and unplayble, and get kicked out of the Pathfinder Society. Just because Paizo leads you into temptation doesn't mean you have to go there. You can refuse to do an Evil faction mission (which would be a Chaotic act, and would lose you a Prestige Point), or you can make-up for it by saving the captives and killing the Evil monster in the main mission, or by being kind to the street urchins, and giving them fireworks and marbles and candy.
As far as the Prestige Points go, I thought that you weren't supposed to win them all anyway. An average 4 out of 6 per level is the game design goal.
|
|
You'd think that would count as an evil actPerhaps, but campaign leadership has decided that the onus of alignment issues fall on the faction head for assigning you said mission. Within the scope of PFS, "just following orders" is a valid defense. An average character need not worry about evil acts when performing their faction missions. That exemption does not, however, apply to paladins or other characters with an extremely narrow margin for immoral actions.
Bob not quite true, for example you can't go out of you way to perform evil acts while doing your faction missions.
There can be many ways to complete a faction mission. You can't perform an evil act while doing a faction mission that does not require an evil act done and get away with it.
|
Venture-Captain, California—San Francisco Bay Area South & West
|
So what do you do as a player when a fellow Pathfinder turns out to be a Psycho?
Here's a slightly less extreme example, which actually occurred recently.
At one point in a scenario I was GMing at a recent convention, the two main front-liners (a barbarian and a cavalier) were attempting to put some serious hurt on a definitely evil opponent. Unfortunately for them, as they very soon discovered, their opponent could teleport (and they could not). Even worse - their ranged weapons didn't seem to have any significant effect on the opponent.
At this point the (CN) raging barbarian just lost it, and started lashing out at anything that was within sword range. This included some other NPCs. They might have been in some way contributing to the opponent's power (although probably not willingly).
The (extremely LG, Silver Crusade) cavalier stepped in to restrain the barbarian at this juncture, protecting the ?innocents?, leaving the remaining members of the party to take care of harassing their opponent. Only after the barbarian had been brought to her senses did the cavalier return to the fight against the powers of evil.
Fortunately the party prevailed (although the NPC that was attacked was not so lucky; a power-attacking barbarian taking a full attack against a prone, unarmoured, flat-footed opponent can reduce an NPC to scattered parts faster than you can swing a greatsword!) Not only that - they had an experience that was a lot more memorable than the usual "see monster; hit monster; repeat until dead" interchangeable encounter.
I'd be only too happy to GM any table where the barbarian's player was seated - she defined the encounter. (I don't get any choice about the cavalier; that's my wife's character :-) I don't feel anybody acted out of character or contrary to their alignment, so I felt no need to take any action from behind the screen.
So what do you do as a player when a fellow Pathfinder turns out to be a Psycho?
When a fellow player turns out to be a phycho I usually... Don't care. If they start doing things I don't want to be a part of I pardon myself from the table until they settle things out and then I come back, saying my character takes a step out not wanting to get involved. Other people do things their own way, but as long as its not too disruptive I don't intend to get in their way. If it does I remove myself and if I can ask them to settle down a little. If I have a problem as a DM I gently ask them to settle down, and remind them its a public setting or that it might make others uncomfortable.
stuff
I disagree.