|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I remember them hunting lycanthropes right up to the present of the setting, especially in whichever country it was that they ruled. The corruption within the Church was one of the canonical examples of how Eberron was different wrt the divine though The openness of interpretation was by far the best part of Eberron though.
|
Looks like it's time to beat the dead horse yet again. Is there even a horse by this point? I think it's probably been reduced to paste. Maybe we've replaced it with a realistic looking fake horse so we don't have to go beat another one. Either way....
The paladin and the necromancer; eternally at odds would be putting it mildly. Both are legal options. The necromancer burns massive amounts of gold and other resources to make certain they've got at least one minion to fight on their behalf. In the end, it'll almost always come down to this. Is it even worth going over this for the millionth time? We already know the majority are going to side with the paladin and say the necromancer's player should just choose another character. If not that, they'll say the two should arrive at a compromise that will invariably screw the necromancer into being disallowed from doing the very thing that character was built to do.
The not so silent minotiry, myself probably included in this, will pop up ten minutes later and go off on some tangent about how it's unfair to constantly default to lulz paladin is right. It will degenerate into argument after argument. But y'know what? Round 190823048204204328; Ready? FIGHT!
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Looks like it's time to beat the dead horse yet again. Is there even a horse by this point? I think it's probably been reduced to paste. Maybe we've replaced it with a realistic looking fake horse so we don't have to go beat another one. Either way....
If the necromancers raise us a dead horse it seems the paladins will be more than happy to beat it to a pulp.
|
|
Looks like it's time to beat the dead horse yet again. Is there even a horse by this point? I think it's probably been reduced to paste. Maybe we've replaced it with a realistic looking fake horse so we don't have to go beat another one. Either way....If the necromancers raise us a dead horse it seems the paladins will be more than happy to beat it to a pulp.
You have a valid point.
|
|
So this has been a very interesting thread for me, as I not only play a paladin but also a necromancer.
The point-blank at the end of the day is this, there are three duties Pathfinders hold as key to the society: cooperate, explore and report. If you are unable to fill one of those duties; then don't be a pathfinder agent, be a hero in Pathfinder RPG. Pathfinder RPG has some pretty dang amazing stuff in it.
If you are bound by a code and worship a god or goddess that does not provide you flexibility; you will find your time in the pathfinder society hard. You are expected to work with those who may in fact be the very taint or enlightenment your order has vowed to destroy. You must either reconcile how your character deals with it, or not.
There are ways you can deal with it.
If the issue is found with you, in that there is another person at the table whose character has caused a roleplay issue; then talk with them. If its something they can control, perhaps they will be willing to not perform said act such as animating undead. If that is core to their character, then my best suggestion then is simply walk away from the table. You or your character are never forced to play. Above anything this is a game and should be played for enjoyment.
This goes on both sides of the fence. This goes for everyone with good deities and empyreal lords, and evil deities and demonic/infernal lords.
This thread has actually got me on a side project now, for myself atleast. In which I am going through the deities, empyreal lords, and demonic lords. The two biggest which seem to have issues so far that I can see for play in society is Saranea, Gozreh and Pharasma. The good news we have such a diverse pantheon of deities, empyreal lords, demonic lords and infenral lords that everyone should be able to find something to worship that suits them.
TLDR remarks: If you are going to play something that forces yourself upon other players, it is best to first try to compromise and if the player does not want to be imposed upon then walk away from the table. Don't be the jerk who forces themselves upon others.
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 8
|
Undead where also a major issue, but since the setting had Deathless, (good/positive energy undead), that where very different, I'm not sure that counts either. One of the things about Eberron, good and bad, is that the setting left so much very vague, and open to interpretation by the reader.[/ooc]
Since it was mentioned earlier but possibly lost in the fray -- there are non-evil undead in Golarion (and in PFS), but it is by no means the standard.
Regarding Eberron -- it still remains in my top three fantasy settings of all time. Lots of good lore there.
|
|
Undead where also a major issue, but since the setting had Deathless, (good/positive energy undead), that where very different, I'm not sure that counts either. One of the things about Eberron, good and bad, is that the setting left so much very vague, and open to interpretation by the reader.[/ooc]Since it was mentioned earlier but possibly lost in the fray -- there are non-evil undead in Golarion (and in PFS), but it is by no means the standard.
Regarding Eberron -- it still remains in my top three fantasy settings of all time. Lots of good lore there.
They nixed the ju ju zombie and the ju ju oracle for being non evil undead. Whats left?
|
|
Undead where also a major issue, but since the setting had Deathless, (good/positive energy undead), that where very different, I'm not sure that counts either. One of the things about Eberron, good and bad, is that the setting left so much very vague, and open to interpretation by the reader.[/ooc]Since it was mentioned earlier but possibly lost in the fray -- there are non-evil undead in Golarion (and in PFS), but it is by no means the standard.
Regarding Eberron -- it still remains in my top three fantasy settings of all time. Lots of good lore there.
There are, but A.) they are not allowed as player options, and B.) they are unique, exceptionally rare individuals, (and I am not sure that they are part of PFS actually). Someone mentioned that there is one in a recent PFS Module, which I am not familiar with, and I never really saw an answer to which one that was. In Golarion, and also in PFS, Undead are inherently Evil. In Eberron, Alignments where a little more free, so you could have the uncommon Good Red Dragon, or non-evil Lich. But they also had the Deathless, which where basically Undead that where not innately born of Evil, and tended to be either Neutral or Good aligned. However, they are not Undead, but the Deathless Subtype. I know there is a Good Ghost in Carrion Crown, a Good or Neutral Vampire out there trying to save his lost soul, and a few not Evil Undead, mostly Ghosts or things like Mummies, but they are all unique individual exceptions, and Paizo wants them to be that only for story reasons. Zombies, Skeletons, Ghouls, etc. . . on the other hand are never non-Evil. In the last thread about this there was an example given of a Necromancer that lost control of his minions, and their default action is to attack and kill the closest living things if not prevented from doing that by a player's abilities like Command Undead.
Skeleton Crew
School necromancy; Level cleric 3, sorcerer/wizard 4, summoner 4, witch 4
Casting Time 1 standard action
Components V, S, M
Range touch
Targets one or more humanoid corpses touched
Duration 1 day/level
Saving Throw none; Spell Resistance no
This spell turns corpses into skeletons (Pathfinder RPG Bestiary 250) that act as crew and obey your commands to the extent of their abilities. The undead you create are 1 Hit Die skeletons that possess Profession (sailor) scores equal to half your character level plus your Wisdom modifier (for clerics), Intelligence modifier (for witches and wizards), or Charisma modifier (for sorcerers and summoners). Each skeleton can perform the duties of one crew member but has no other abilities. The created skeletons cannot speak, attack, or even defend themselves. The only orders they obey are ones pertaining to the operation of a ship. Skeletal crew members are not proficient with any weapons or armor. You can’t create more Hit Dice of skeletal crew members than twice your caster level with a single casting of skeleton
crew. The desecrate spell doubles this limit. The undead you create by casting skeleton crew remain under your control for the duration of the spell, and do not count against your limit of total Hit Dice worth of undead creatures you can control. A skeletal crew member can only be created from a mostly intact humanoid corpse. The corpse must have bones. When you cast this spell, any flesh left on the corpses melts away into fog.
It was indicated that this was supposed to be [Evil], and errata'd but I'm not sure if that ever happened. All other non-Evil Undead have been banned or removed though, to my knowledge. Juju Oracle Zombies, the Shadowdancer's Summon Shadow, and a handful of other things that Paizo said "slipped through the cracks".
|
|
I remember them hunting lycanthropes right up to the present of the setting, especially in whichever country it was that they ruled. The corruption within the Church was one of the canonical examples of how Eberron was different wrt the divine though The openness of interpretation was by far the best part of Eberron though.
It's been a while, but I looked back into it. The Silver Flame did eradicate all Lycanthropes from Eberron, but it was not only by the sword, and the implication was that Lycanthropy was basically becoming a plague (and was the sort of Eberron equivalent of The Plague). They made a lot of effort to break the curses and some groups also made sure to transport the good Lycanthropes to Lamannia, a different plane, so they could live their lives in peace and not risk Cursing others. The goal was to destroy the Curse that corrupted people and not to just go slaughter. It's kind of like in Mendev, where there are both Paladins and holy warriors fighting the good fight and then there are also the Low Templars and clergy of Gorum that are just there for battle. But a lot of Eberron was left very vague, so it's up to the individual groups to decide just how much of it was one or the other.
|
|
So let's coin a new term for PFS paladins: PINO's. Paladins in Name Only. Because explore, report, cooperate, and "don't be a jerk" basically neuters the actual paladin's options of how to react to Mr. Necrocmancer.
I do hope I am reading you wrongly David, but if your understanding of paladins is only to smash the undead and to pertain to certain set actions; I do encourage you to take some time to read the lore in Pathfinder to see a wide range of paladins can hold to their faith and work alongside a necromancer or undead. The paladins of the following entities are definitely not PINO's.
1. Abadar2. Erastil
3. Shelyn
4. Torag
5. Aroden. The dead deity of humanity.
6. The Empyreal Lord Andoletta
7. The Empyreal Lord Arqueros
8. The Empyreal Lord Damerrich
9. The Empyreal Lord Falayna
10. The Empyreal Lord Ghenshau
11. The Empyreal Lord Kelinahat
12. The Empyreal Lord Kroina
13, The Empyreal Lord Olheon
14. The Empyreal Lord Smiad
15. The Empyreal Lord Svarozic
16. The Empyreal Lord Tanagaar
17. The Empyreal Lord Winlas
18. The Empyreal Lord Zohls
19. The Empyreal Lord Bharnarol
20. The Empyreal Lord Eritrice
21. The Empyreal Lord Halcamora
22. The Empyreal Lord Irez
23. The Empyreal Lord Jaidz
24. The Empyreal Lord Korada
25. The Empyreal Lord Lorris
26. The Empyreal Lord Lythertida
27. The Empyreal Lord Ondisso
28. The Empyreal Lord Rowdrosh
29. The Empyreal Lord Shei
30. The Empyreal Lord Uskyeria
31. The Empyreal Lord Ylimancha
32. The Empyreal Lord Arshea
33. The Empyreal Lord Benorus
34. The Empyreal Lord Dalenydra
35. The Empyreal Lord Neshen
36. The Empyreal Lord Ragathiel
37. The Empyreal Lord Seramaydiel
38. The Empyreal Lord Soralyon
39. The Empyreal Lord Vildeis
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
So let's coin a new term for PFS paladins: PINO's. Paladins in Name Only. Because explore, report, cooperate, and "don't be a jerk" basically neuters the actual paladin's options of how to react to Mr. Necrocmancer.
And I repeat again, if your paladin would not work with a necromancer; then walk away from the table or try to find a compromise. If someones necromancer does not want to work with a paladin, then they can walk away from the table also.
Whatever. That is a very messed up way to roll for me. I'm with the above poster: I wouldn't get anywhere near your table with any of my characters.
Also please take note that paladins have smite EVIL, not smite CHAOS. That alone should show where the priority is. Your set up is just an excuse to grief players.
Paladins took center point again because the are the #1 issue with necromancers in a group. It was a natural outcome of the topic.
I would like to comment that my paladin has both smite evil and smite chaos. :)
Ironically, he's a lot more mellow than many other paladins I've met. Part of that is the whole zen thing being a Champion of Irori and all.
-j
|
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 8
|
They nixed the ju ju zombie and the ju ju oracle for being non evil undead. Whats left?Undead where also a major issue, but since the setting had Deathless, (good/positive energy undead), that where very different, I'm not sure that counts either. One of the things about Eberron, good and bad, is that the setting left so much very vague, and open to interpretation by the reader.[/ooc]Since it was mentioned earlier but possibly lost in the fray -- there are non-evil undead in Golarion (and in PFS), but it is by no means the standard.
Regarding Eberron -- it still remains in my top three fantasy settings of all time. Lots of good lore there.
DM Beckett covered it fairly well. Evil undead is the norm, but not the rule.
The one in Dragon's Demand is
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This is how it should work for PFS
The paladin doesn't smite the undead during the scenario
The necromancer does not command the undead to twerk the paladin while saying "Nyah nyah can't hit me"
And the DM doesn't make the paladin cough up an atonement for abiding by society in game/out of game rules.
Anyone have a problem with that?
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This is how it should work for PFS
The paladin doesn't smite the undead during the scenario
The necromancer does not command the undead to twerk the paladin while saying "Nyah nyah can't hit me"
And the DM doesn't make the paladin cough up an atonement for abiding by society in game/out of game rules.
Anyone have a problem with that?
Only that it's not in the Guide. Can we get that in the next edition? Because that's pretty much perfectly phrased.
|
|
Right somehow this whole argument went directly to paladin's versus necromancers. I would point out that in the section regarding necromancers and pharasma, there are white necromancers... those which do not antimate undead. There are also feats which summon undead monsters instead of the standard summoning spells.
I play a cleric of pharasma, and yes it is his duty to put to rest undead and return them to the cycle. However if they can be used to further the goals of the church, and then returned... what is the problem? If i had a necromancer in my party, i would talk to him and see if he was a white necromancer or a standard one. Then we would have a discussion about the use of undead in the mission, an accord reached and we continue... its pretty simple.
Regarding paladin's smiting everything, they follow the law... killing simply because something is evil is evil in itself. Look at certain faiths, Sarenrae believes in bringing redemption to evil creatures if possible. Shelyn, does so in similiar ways, due to the hope that her faithful can bring back her brother. Such stories are not the norm granted, but burying your weapons in everything because its evil... well that is not exactly right either.
Example, laws require courts and hearings, is the paladin of that faith the judge, jury, and executioner? Sure if the said creature was committing an evil act directly in front of the paladin, he/she would be required to act... of course creatures of the lower planes and other monster types should be attacked as per ethos, but slaying humans or there ilk... not so much. They should be carrying manacles and bring in prisoners for legal punishment... if they are slain in combat, so be it. That was the fate which was in store for them.
|
|
Right somehow this whole argument went directly to paladin's versus necromancers.
It's a common one, and there are a lot splits and takes on it, particularly in PFS.
Regarding paladin's smiting everything, they follow the law... killing simply because something is evil is evil in itself.
You need to remember that in D&D/Pathfinder, Alignment is not abstract nor is it a matter of perspective. It is objective, not subjective. Some acts are Good, others are Chaotic, others are Evil, regardless of the outcome or intentions. Killing an evil creature is actually a good act. It's not the only good act that can be done sometimes, (like you said, try to redeem, arrest for a fair trial, whatever), but it itself is a good act. Now, you can house rule these things in, but that is not the way the game works. You can also mostly ignore Alignment as many have suggested here, or sweep it under the rug, but again that's not really the way the game works. It's also not a set in stone straight jacket for what an individual can and can not do or believe. Another thing to keep in mind is that being Lawful does not mean you follow the laws. It can, but it can also mean that they follow a defined personal (or even religious) code, admire and strive for order, are all about self-discipline, tradition, tactics, and structure. They believe that the individual is there to strengthen the masses, (rather than the other way around being chaotic).
ADVANTAGES AND CHALLENGES
Lawful good characters are proficient at understanding bureaucracies, following laws, and cultivating order and structure in their own lives and in others’. They are naturally helpful, and others find them trustworthy, even if they don’t share the same alignment. Additionally, lawful good characters are adept at deciding which actions are lawful and benefit society rather than the individual. With their focus on order, they can often build governmental stability where none previously existed. These characters sometimes have problems defying laws, even when the laws are unjust. Instead of disobeying or protesting against such laws, they work within the provided structure or system to change those laws, and they implore others to do so as well. They feel guilty lying to others, even if only asked to fib to provide a ruse for their companions. Similarly, they won’t break the law to help good-intentioned party members perform actions that might have beneficial results. When they’re adventuring in urban areas with their companions, lawful good characters may feel compelled to excuse themselves from certain plans or attempt to reason with those more lenient in their interpretation of the law. It’s much easier for lawful good characters to ignore the bad behavior of other party members when exploring ruins and wilderness areas outside the direct jurisdiction of a governing body.
Paladins on the other hand, serve higher purposes. Arguably more Good than Law (of the two), as their code talks more about not doing evil than not doing chaos, and the class is best against Evil, not Chaos. At best they are equal, but it's pretty arguable that Good is the more important of the two. However, Paladins are also called to be one of the swords and fists of their deity or of the powers of Goodness in general. While they should probably try to work within a given areas laws, (more because they strive for order and justice than because they are required to follow the law jus' 'cause), they are not bound to do so, and certainly not to do so at the expense of their faith or Goodness in general.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It was interesting. Unearthed Arcana did another for the CG, LE, and CE paladins that was really good. Someone also pointed out that the Antipaladin is essentially the most party friendly divine warrior out there, because of the clauses "this does not mean that an antipaladin cannot take actions someone else might qualify as good, only that such actions must always be in service of his own dark ends" and "provided such actions don't interfere with his goals."
|
In cases like Geb it is far more straightforward and the paladin can just go on crusade to kill the undead citizens. Probably likewise with the nobles of Nidal and the orcs in the Hold of Belkzen.Oh my God, you'd let a paladin walk into a land where intelligent creatures rule in relative peace and just slaughter them? Are you kidding me with this?
Maybe you have missed the memo, but they eat intelligent beings. Living people are used as cattle.
It's bad enough being enslaved to all goodly laws, but now you want them enslaved to every law>.<
Simply false.
Honestly what I get from your posts is:
- it is acceptable to be a jerk when GMing a paladin
I don't know if there is plenty of people that suffered some terrible psychological trauma when playing with people that used paladin characters, but it seem there is a incredible level of hate for them in these boards.
- * -
BNW (and I m not placing you with the the paladin haters), remember that "lawful" don't mean simply "someone that follow the human laws".
The law/chaos axis was born from Moorcock novels and a lawful character, while he would be inclined to follow a nation law, will judge it, on the basis of truthfulness, respect for tradition and reliability. A Lawful person "judge those who fall short of their duties" and a ruler that don't care for his subjects fall short of its duties.
A paladin can live in a land where slavery is practiced, as long as the rules are fair (i.e. there is a way to recover your freedom, slaves are reasonably well treated, they aren't killed for fun, that they are still cared for when unable to work and so on) and it is not race based.
Slavery, under fair rules, is not much different from forced labor from convicted criminals (and we know that even that can be unfair in some land).
In that kind of land he could work with the government to guarantee that the rules are respected and to set up movements to abolish slavery.
On the other hand, in a land like Geb where sentient living beings are used as cattle by undead, he should and will opposite the government with any means available.
- * -
I think you guys should read Elizabeth Moon Paskennarion novels.
|
|
Looks like it's time to beat the dead horse yet again. Is there even a horse by this point? I think it's probably been reduced to paste. Maybe we've replaced it with a realistic looking fake horse so we don't have to go beat another one. Either way....
The paladin and the necromancer; eternally at odds would be putting it mildly. Both are legal options. The necromancer burns massive amounts of gold and other resources to make certain they've got at least one minion to fight on their behalf. In the end, it'll almost always come down to this. Is it even worth going over this for the millionth time? We already know the majority are going to side with the paladin and say the necromancer's player should just choose another character. If not that, they'll say the two should arrive at a compromise that will invariably screw the necromancer into being disallowed from doing the very thing that character was built to do.
The not so silent minotiry, myself probably included in this, will pop up ten minutes later and go off on some tangent about how it's unfair to constantly default to lulz paladin is right. It will degenerate into argument after argument. But y'know what? Round 190823048204204328; Ready? FIGHT!
To me it seem that there are more necromancer supporters than paladin supporters in this thread. I agree that we should find a balance point while playing. My solution, if I was the one with the character that is un-agreeable with some of the character at the table would be to search another table or, if not feasible, to change character for the scenario.
I am more pro paladin than pro necromancer for aesthetic/sanitation reason: most undead are rotting corpses. They smell horribly and are unsanitary. Not the best companions when traveling.Skeletons are one of the exceptions. Clean and smell less.
Barring a follower of some specific god I would have no problems traveling with skeletal or incorporeal undead.
|
|
BNW (and I m not placing you with the the paladin haters), remember that "lawful" don't mean simply "someone that follow the human laws".
For other classes this is true. A lawful Evil assassin for example would only care about the laws of their guild. A lawful neutral druid might have unwavering loyalty to their "alpha" regardless of human laws. A lawful good andoran fighter might only hold to the laws of andoran.
Part of the paladins code however is a respect authority. Laws are how the authorities tell you what they don't want done. A paladin seeing a gross abuse of law to evil ends right in front of him, say a town guard flogging someone to death for stealing a loaf of bread, can by all means break the law to intervene as a last restort, but it shouldn't become a habit.
PFS scenarios have enough ... questionable activities that it WOULD probably become a habit if it was being tracked between sessions. Its not though, so I can DM and let the paladins player get on with the serious business of having some fun pretending to delve dungeons.
I am pro player choice and anti pre gen. If someone choses to play a paladin they get to play a paladin. If someone chooses to play a necromancer with a bag of holding full of corpses then thats what they play.
|
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 8
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
BNW (and I m not placing you with the the paladin haters), remember that "lawful" don't mean simply "someone that follow the human laws".For other classes this is true. A lawful Evil assassin for example would only care about the laws of their guild. A lawful neutral druid might have unwavering loyalty to their "alpha" regardless of human laws. A lawful good andoran fighter might only hold to the laws of andoran.
Part of the paladins code however is a respect authority. Laws are how the authorities tell you what they don't want done. A paladin seeing a gross abuse of law to evil ends right in front of him, say a town guard flogging someone to death for stealing a loaf of bread, can by all means break the law to intervene as a last restort, but it shouldn't become a habit.
PFS scenarios have enough ... questionable activities that it WOULD probably become a habit if it was being tracked between sessions. Its not though, so I can DM and let the paladins player get on with the serious business of having some fun pretending to delve dungeons.
I am pro player choice and anti pre gen. If someone choses to play a paladin they get to play a paladin. If someone chooses to play a necromancer with a bag of holding full of corpses then thats what they play.
BNW's RPGSS 2015 submission: bag of holding corpses
|
People objecting isn't pvp, thats inter party conflict. I summon a ton of undead, it's what I do, because there isnt quite anything like having grandma dig herself up to lend aid.
Also, this isn't a pet, it's a 25 gold per hd spell, and there have been times when I have had 44hd worth of undead out,
with my familiar. I would be very cross if someone told me I couldn't use multiple resources and a few thousand gold pieces for my toys not to work.
44HD of undead? Gunslinger's seem rather tame now. What if the wizard, just doing HIS thing, fireballs the badguy just as your undead gather round him?
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Seems to me that the wizard should ask for permission just like they would if they were about to nuke a druid's animal companion. Those undead are extremely expensive to make, and you don't even get to keep them between scenarios. If nothing else, they could delay until the undead are no longer in harm's way. ... Of course, if they're fighting the last boss or something I'd say it's no real loss, as they cannot be kept anyway.
|
|
44HD of undead? Gunslinger's seem rather tame now. What if the wizard, just doing HIS thing, fireballs the badguy just as your undead gather round him?People objecting isn't pvp, thats inter party conflict. I summon a ton of undead, it's what I do, because there isnt quite anything like having grandma dig herself up to lend aid.
Also, this isn't a pet, it's a 25 gold per hd spell, and there have been times when I have had 44hd worth of undead out,
with my familiar. I would be very cross if someone told me I couldn't use multiple resources and a few thousand gold pieces for my toys not to work.
Which then goes to is the wizard who tosses the fireball trying to be a jerk by throwing it in an area to include the udnead? Then it comes up to the interpretation does the pvp rule include pets or not. There seems to be so much variance out there from table to table what pvp is, that I am not going to touch that one with a 10-foot pole.
|
|
All of that raises the question of, since fireball is a three dimensional spell, why not cast it above the target so just the one down facing arm hits the ground and spares everyone in the surrounding squares.
Interestingly I have found that DMs get really huffy when you try to use the z-axis. This also applies to mmoving flying creatures directly over someone's head so they can't 5-foot step away.
|
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 8
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
All of that raises the question of, since fireball is a three dimensional spell, why not cast it above the target so just the one down facing arm hits the ground and spares everyone in the surrounding squares.Interestingly I have found that DMs get really huffy when you try to use the z-axis. This also applies to mmoving flying creatures directly over someone's head so they can't 5-foot step away.
Whenever I read about what other GMs do, I wonder if my area is just a little bubble of awesome volunteers that work with players to craft amazing table experiences.
Whenever I read about what other GMs do, I wonder if my area is just a little bubble of awesome volunteers that work with players to craft amazing table experiences.All of that raises the question of, since fireball is a three dimensional spell, why not cast it above the target so just the one down facing arm hits the ground and spares everyone in the surrounding squares.Interestingly I have found that DMs get really huffy when you try to use the z-axis. This also applies to mmoving flying creatures directly over someone's head so they can't 5-foot step away.
Our table loves the z-axis.
On players creating undead things get sticky. This is purely from a role playing perspective - Our group has always seen spells with the evil descriptor as being corrupting by nature - their continued use would lead to an alignment shift due to repeated exposure to dark energies such spells expose the caster to.
That doesn't mean I or the other GM I alter with wouldn't allow a non-evil necromancer at the table but the caster would be in a constant struggle with "damnation" as it were, as he or she poured dark energies necessary to animate a corpse through their mind and body.
|
Seems to me that the wizard should ask for permission just like they would if they were about to nuke a druid's animal companion. Those undead are extremely expensive to make, and you don't even get to keep them between scenarios. If nothing else, they could delay until the undead are no longer in harm's way. ... Of course, if they're fighting the last boss or something I'd say it's no real loss, as they cannot be kept anyway.
Why should they? No one stopped to ask permission before a heaven's oracle color sprayed my magus.
|
|
Normally how I see pvp handle at my tables or tables I play at, the other player has to be consent for the spells to go off on them, otherwise its a no and ruled as pvp. But there is huge variance to what actually is pvp in PFS. I have seen some tables well the GM has allowed other players to literally damage another player in order to get there things off such as splash weapons to fire balling the other players. Its kind of a grey area, and I wish there was some more clarity out there on pvp.
|
|
Normally how I see pvp handle at my tables or tables I play at, the other player has to be consent for the spells to go off on them, otherwise its a no and ruled as pvp. But there is huge variance to what actually is pvp in PFS. I have seen some tables well the GM has allowed other players to literally damage another player in order to get there things off such as splash weapons to fire balling the other players. Its kind of a grey area, and I wish there was some more clarity out there on pvp.
Label me bitter because I hate the rules for heavens oracles and I hate the fact that one KOed me in a 35 minute fight because they were lazy with their blast pattern.
|
|
Seems to me that the wizard should ask for permission just like they would if they were about to nuke a druid's animal companion. Those undead are extremely expensive to make, and you don't even get to keep them between scenarios. If nothing else, they could delay until the undead are no longer in harm's way. ... Of course, if they're fighting the last boss or something I'd say it's no real loss, as they cannot be kept anyway.Why should they? No one stopped to ask permission before a heaven's oracle color sprayed my magus.
...and two wrongs make a right. Someone once forced your to sit out of a fight so everyone everywhere should be able to willfully attack another person's resources with AoEs.
In short, the person should have asked. I have consented (suggested actually) to this very thing happening to my character before. But I would be much more reluctant to tell someone they can permanently destroy my minions than they can temporarily incapacitate me.