Razmiran Sorcerer


Pathfinder Society

Sczarni 2/5

So how good or bad of an idea will it be to have a Razmiran "Cleric" who insinuates himself into the society?

My idea for him is to have a vow of non-violence (due to a challenge from another player to make something not overpowering in damage, as I do that way to easily) and to buff/debuff in combat with some healing.

His back story is, as an Ifrit Blood originally from Qadira, he joined the cult of Razmir where he learned the art of charlatanism and developed it to the point of near perfection (high bluff and perform:act[closest perform that fits a charlatan] along with a decent diplomacy and intimidate to assist allow for almost always a success). Using his talents he insinuated himself into a local lodge under the guise of a Priest who is bent on ferreting out the corrupt Razmirans, as a true Rasmiran wouldn't do the evil things they are normally accused of... ;)

Now that I have traveled with some pathfinders, I convince any new Pathfinders that I am a cleric, but that Razmir grants his powers differently (unless they have knowledge religion, they take the bluff). As I heal (infernal healing) I convince the character getting healed that the weight of their sins prevents the full blessing of Razmir, thus the slowness of the healing and the feeling of evil in their soul...when I can afford the 2nd level ring of spell knowledge I plan to snag one and have CLW put in it just because.

Yes I know technically you can not use social skills against other players, however so far the 2 tables I have sat down at with him have humored the role-play of this as it doesn't adversely affect them or the story.

Grand Lodge

Razmir himself is one of the Decemvirate after all. Surely all pathfinders are working for the great and powerful Razmir.

Sczarni 2/5

I am secretly suspicious of this as well...since supposedly in the vaults of the grand lodge they have that item that can help him ascend to divinity...he is just still looking through their treasure load..it takes a while, what with us "pathfinders" still collecting and bringing in new items... ;)

The Exchange 5/5 RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16

Those people who believe that Razmir is a god certainly understand him to be Lawful Evil.

There are player characters who, for ethical reasons, choose not to receive infernal healing. Subjecting a PC to the spell, while withholding an explanation about what it is, would run the border of PvP.

Sczarni 2/5

Chris, did you not read my line about that? I bluff the heck out of it as their sins convicting them....that is why they feel evil... :)

The Exchange 5/5 RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16

I did read your line. My position stands. You can put all the little smiley-icons on it that you like. Your PC is lying to an ally and violating the "Cooperate" part of the Pathfinder Motto.

As you say, Bluff doesn't work under those circumstances. A recipient with Spellcraft can tell quite clearly what your PC is doing.

I've seen players nearly come to blows towards one another about infernal healing; it's one of the most fractious elements of the game. At my table, I don't allow PCs to cast it on one another, unless the recipient's player agrees.

Shadow Lodge 2/5

Shfish wrote:
Chris, did you not read my line about that? I bluff the heck out of it as their sins convicting them....that is why they feel evil... :)

Just because you lie to your party, it doesn't make it any better. I'm sure there are plenty of characters, a few of mine included, who would rather die than be anointed in devil's blood.

"You anoint a wounded creature with devil’s blood or unholy water, giving it fast healing 1."

Sczarni 2/5

False focus: I use my holy symbol mask as a focus instead for up to 100gp of component costs.

The Exchange 5/5 RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16

Shfish, if you and your friends at a local store have this worked out at your games, and you're all good with it, more power to you.

But really, if you travel to a large convention and pull this stunt, you are asking for trouble. There are characters who will get very angry at your characters. There are players who will get very angry at you. Which is why I enforce the rules for "Bluffing other PCs" and why I won't allow the infernal healing if the recipient player objects.

Scarab Sages 1/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I love how all of reality has to bend over backward to keep lawful stupid types happy.

Grand Lodge 4/5 **** Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento

Except that in a world where hell really exists, and there is a spell that allows hell to reach out and touch your soul to heal your body, refusing to let it do that isn't lawful stupid, it's smart good.

And it isn't reality bending over backward to keep my lawful stupid type happy. It is reality bending over backward to keep my chaotic good type from going PVP on your evil character after I find out you are bathing me in the power of hell and lying to me about it.

Grand Lodge 4/5

I run a Razmiran Priest Sorcerer, but, OOC, I make sure that my tablemates know that the wand is Infernal Healing, not CLW, and have their buy-in before I use it on them. He also has a wand of CLW that he will attempt to use, if requested. He has better than a 50% chance of activating it, but, at some point, he probably won't be able to use it for the rest of the day...

Note that mine is a member of the Sczarni faction...

3/5

Chris Mortika wrote:
There are characters who will get very angry at your characters. There are players who will get very angry at you. Which is why I enforce the rules for "Bluffing other PCs" and why I won't allow the infernal healing if the recipient player objects.

I see how the character would be angry if they had spellcraft or failed to see through the bluff, but if the player had such a failure to separate IC and OOC then I'm sorry but it is the player of the Goody-Two-Shoes that is the problem, not the guy with the fun RP about what his healing magic is. I really hope there are not actually any players like this, especially not if they are players of Paladins and such.

From a purely in-game logic standpoint I would think that "the tingly evil feeling is just your own sin" is exactly the kind of lie that a self-loathing lawful stupid, somewhat INT dumped paladin would believe. As long as all the players are in on it I feel that it would be appropriate and add to the intra-party RP at just about any table.

4/5 ****

The target detects as an evil creature for the duration of the spell and can sense the evil of the magic, though this has no long-term effect.

Emphasis Mine.

Spellcraft is not required to know that receiving Infernal Healing is evil.

A paladin who compromises their morals for momentary solace by suckling from a demon's teat has truly compromised themselves.

A paladin who unknowingly accepts such a gift from an ally should say a prayer to ward off further evil and accept no more gifts from that friend for even if they are a steadfast ally and strong supporter of all that is righteous, their magic involves the dark arts and is not for you.

For your path is a hard one, requiring great sacrifice and ultimate devotion to a moral code, so that with your last breath you can take comfort in a life of absolute righteousness.

The Exchange 5/5 RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16

Saint Caleth wrote:


I see how the character would be angry if they had spellcraft or failed to see through the bluff, but if the player had such a failure to separate IC and OOC then I'm sorry but it is the player of the Goody-Two-Shoes that is the problem, not the guy with the fun RP about what his healing magic is. I really hope there are not actually any players like this ...

Oh, trust me; there really are players who don't like you keeping them in the dark about how your character is messing with theirs and lying about it. And I really don't think they're the problem.

Quote:
As long as all the players are in on it I feel that it would be appropriate and add to the intra-party RP at just about any table.

As I say, if everybody's on board, then that's great. But really, if the recipient's player isn't on board, doesn't casting Evil spells on the character strike you as a dumb thing to do?

--

Back to the OP: has the "vow of non-violence" worked out? What are your plans, if you're the only party member left standing?

3/5

Chris Mortika wrote:
Saint Caleth wrote:


I see how the character would be angry if they had spellcraft or failed to see through the bluff, but if the player had such a failure to separate IC and OOC then I'm sorry but it is the player of the Goody-Two-Shoes that is the problem, not the guy with the fun RP about what his healing magic is. I really hope there are not actually any players like this ...
Oh, trust me; there really are players who don't like you keeping them in the dark about how your character is messing with theirs and lying about it. And I really don't think they're the problem.

The lying is IC. To my mind for a player to get upset about that is a massive failure to separate reality from fantasy. I guess I am just lucky to not have encountered any of these horror story disruptive players yet.

Liberty's Edge 5/5 *

Rinne, Priestess of Razmir wrote:
Razmir himself is one of the Decemvirate after all. Surely all pathfinders are working for the great and powerful Razmir.

Preach it sister! Why would anyone from Razmirian NOT join the Pathfinder Society knowing the TRUE living god is the one influencing us and giving us order. By virtue of association, working for the Pathfinder Society is YET another step closer to Razmir's graces.

As any good Paladin, If anyone wants to receive the holy healing of Razmir, I will gladly lay on hands on them and bring them back to health with us. So far in my adventures, noone has refused it.

Liberty's Edge 2/5

Saint Caleth wrote:
Chris Mortika wrote:
Saint Caleth wrote:


I see how the character would be angry if they had spellcraft or failed to see through the bluff, but if the player had such a failure to separate IC and OOC then I'm sorry but it is the player of the Goody-Two-Shoes that is the problem, not the guy with the fun RP about what his healing magic is. I really hope there are not actually any players like this ...
Oh, trust me; there really are players who don't like you keeping them in the dark about how your character is messing with theirs and lying about it. And I really don't think they're the problem.
The lying is IC. To my mind for a player to get upset about that is a massive failure to separate reality from fantasy. I guess I am just lucky to not have encountered any of these horror story disruptive players yet.

I believe this comes down to how it IS handled OOC. I have seen players, not in PFS, hide their shenanigans both IC and OOC simply because it amuses them. If you go to a table with a paladin and successfully dupe his character into receiving a rather evil spell simply because it amuses you and continuing this OOC by not letting the player know your character is a lying prick, then that's going into the "don't be a jerk" category. Especially if another party member comes up afterwards and says "Hey man, you might want an atonement. That was evil." Now suddenly the player of the paladin has to foot the bill for an atonement or otherwise with no repercussions to the player who cast on him.

I have a CG cavalier who would be very angry at having that cast on him. If though the player states his OOC intentions and has my blessing, and successfully does Bluff my character well then all the power to you. It is very unlikely my character if he finds out will ever aid you again, but as long as everything is in the open OOC I am perfectly fine. Most of the players I come across are the same way. I do not think this player will receive any hate for simply asking the table "Would you mind if I do this? If no, thats cool."

3/5

Again I guess I am just lucky to have never really had to be at a table with that kind of disruptive player; either the stuck up paladin or the trickster jerk.

Your way of dealing with it for your cavalier is what I was imagining as the mature way.

4/5

Bottom line:
Don't lie to other players.
If other players don't want you to do something to their characters, don't do it.
Talk out potential problems beforehand.
Have fun.¹

¹ and if your fun comes at the expense of other players, consider whether organized play is the best choice for you²
² not implying that this is the case for anyone here³
³ recursive footnote³

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Matthew Trent wrote:
I love how all of reality has to bend over backward to keep lawful stupid types happy.

I love it more when people forget that when you sit down at a PFS table that it's about everyone's fun, not just their own. That this is not a free for all sandbox campaign where anything goes because that's how a permissive GM rolls.

It's a campaign that's visible, very public, and runs by family friendly standards. Which means that there are compromises to be made to that unlimited wellspring of player creativity.

If yanking the chain of your fellow players, is your thing, there are homebrew games that roll that way. If you can't abide the standards of the Campaign Guide which you make an implicit agreement to by sitting at a PFS table, there are campaigns better suited to your tastes out there.

This isn't an exclusively a message to the Snidely Whiplashes out there, There are those Duddly DoRights that are almost as problematic when it comes to playing nice with their tablemates.

5/5 5/55/55/5

Matthew Trent wrote:
I love how all of reality has to bend over backward to keep lawful stupid types happy.

keep in mind its also bending over backwards so those types don't lynch mob you.

Silver Crusade 5/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I like the rp of it; just do what I do with My Razmiran Priest: when you sit down at the table, ask ooc if any of the characters won't accept it.

Grand Lodge 4/5 5/55/5 ** Venture-Lieutenant, Florida—Melbourne

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Matthew Trent wrote:
I love how all of reality has to bend over backward to keep lawful stupid types happy.

My Paladin not allowing your character to cast Infernal Healing on yourself because I think your character has to live by my standards is bending over backwards to keep lawful stupid types happy.

My Paladin allowing your character to cast Infernal Healing on him because you think my character has to live by your standards is bending over backwards to keep chaotic jerk types happy.

Grand Lodge 4/5 5/55/5 ** Venture-Lieutenant, Florida—Melbourne

Saint Caleth wrote:
Again I guess I am just lucky to have never really had to be at a table with that kind of disruptive player; either the stuck up paladin or the trickster jerk.

The closest I have seen in PFS is a CN Magus that keeps threatening to heal my Paladin/Gunslinger with Infernal Healing next time I go unconscious. The person playing the CN Magus is my wife.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
trollbill wrote:
Saint Caleth wrote:
Again I guess I am just lucky to have never really had to be at a table with that kind of disruptive player; either the stuck up paladin or the trickster jerk.
The closest I have seen in PFS is a CN Magus that keeps threatening to heal my Paladin/Gunslinger with Infernal Healing next time I go unconscious. The person playing the CN Magus is my wife.

As a GM I wouldn't have a problem with that because....

A. I never get in the middle of husband wife table throwdowns. :)

More importantly B.

B. There's no stain on the Paladin receiving that spell in those circumstances. The only thing the Paladin player would have to worry about would be an Iomedan inquisitor casting Detect Evil at the wrong moment. Although in fairness the Paladin should be challenging him to Detect Good as well.

Silver Crusade 2/5

I had a player have his wizard cast infernal healing on my paladin. I was shocked that he would attempt to do that, and that the supposedly intelligent wizard would do that in-game. All I did was ask for the dc of the will save to resist the spell.

I haven't played with that player since, I don't think.

5/5 *

DesolateHarmony wrote:

I had a player have his wizard cast infernal healing on my paladin. I was shocked that he would attempt to do that, and that the supposedly intelligent wizard would do that in-game. All I did was ask for the dc of the will save to resist the spell.

I haven't played with that player since, I don't think.

Not all paladins will outright refuse Infernal Healing. Iomedae and Serenrae probably have a... greater reason not to accept it, but beyond those two the rest would have to depend on the circumstance.

Mission to defend an invaluable painting for a Paladin of Shelyn and it's either take infernal healing or fall unconscious in battle? If that paladin took it at my table I wouldn't have a problem with it.

YMMV

Also, holy derail batman.

Sczarni 2/5

Chris Mortika wrote:


--

Back to the OP: has the "vow of non-violence" worked out? What are your plans, if you're the only party member left standing?

My DC's are 20 for 1st level charm spells, 21 if its lanugage dependent and they might find me attractive. As I play this person to be very Adrogenous(sp) I leave it to the DM to decide when that applies :) [See Earl of Porros from Guin Saga anime].

Level 3 now (DM Credit)
I bluff at a 12 base +10 with mask of stony demeanor for lies.

So far here has been his experience:
Played a season 5, I got to talk EVERY humanoid encounter down, to include (at the DM fiat because it was funny and really fit) pretend to be a Qadiran Prince and married myself off...and since I'm a priest of Razmir I have the authority to do that [playing off how most cults operate in the US for ideas on behaviors, but keeping from the too creepy parts].

Played a season 5, in the first encounter I used charm person and lock gaze to assist my allies. 2nd battle an insane bluff check of 42 got us past the 'start' and into the heart of the encounter where, when we got found out, I used lock gaze and the group Alpha Striked him into oblivion. When we returned to town and delt with 2 more fights I went down to -8 out of *cough* 10 con, so was out for the whole combat. In the final, I used enlarge person (page of spell knolwedge is awesome btw) on 2 of our characters and used them as meat shields for lock gaze.

So far it has been fun and the people at the tables have said they enjoyed playing with this character. I will have some real healing to use to assist with either obstinate characters (or players) so as to not violate the rules..but I do upfront let them know the schtick of this guy so they can tell me.
Your second question though is why I have vanish as one of my spells...if manure hits the fan I'm gone...I might even retrieve their bodies...I mean..I am a planted agent after all...I should at least pretend to help my allies survive ;)

Shadow Lodge 4/5

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens Subscriber

I certainly wouldn't consider it a PvP action to use Infernal Healing to save a "conscientious objector" PC from death. Doing it to spite them would be, but if the Paladin is dying, my LN Magus is going to Infernally Heal the crap out of his fatal injuries, his 'sanctimonious prattling' (as she would put it) be damned straight to where her spell came from.

Discussing it OOC with the Paladin's player, though, would be well advised. I love the idea of a Paladin rolling a will save against the spell, fearing the taint of devilish power.

My Paladin would probably accept such healing if it meant him being able to protect an innocent or apprehend a great evil, but he would go atone for it afterwards.

The Exchange 4/5 5/5

Please see one of the 16 other infernal healing threads.

The Exchange 4/5 5/5

As for the original poster, I know of at least one "priest of Razmir" who has been around for a couple of years. The player (whose identity I will not reveal) is very much into the roleplaying side of things and his continual shouts of "For the Glory of Razmir!" have kept everyone greatly entertained. He play(ed) it at several local conventions and I never saw anyone get upset at his play style.

That said... he casts spells from his actual class, and never pretends they are anything else. Whenever anyone questions how a cleric has cast at least six spells that don't appear on the cleric spell list, his response is "The power of Razmir transcends a puny barrier of spell type! He grants ALL spells!

Personally...:
I have a character that uses a different mechanic and play style that keeps other players from knowing just what it is. A lot of people have been curious about how I pull off some things but the GMs who have audited it have not had problems. Massive bluff and disguise skills are of course a must. It's actually become a bit of an amusement for players at the table to try to figure out what it is. "OK, that spell isn't on the cleric list." "Hmmm... you don't see many wizards wading into melee." "Pretty sure you have to have at least one level of witch to do that."

Scarab Sages 2/5

Shfish wrote:

My DC's are 20 for 1st level charm spells, 21 if its lanugage dependent and they might find me attractive. As I play this person to be very Adrogenous(sp) I leave it to the DM to decide when that applies :) [See Earl of Porros from Guin Saga anime].
Level 3 now (DM Credit)
I bluff at a 12 base +10 with mask of stony demeanor for lies.

Do note that a mask of stony demeanor makes it where your face looks like a statue and you speak on a monotone voice. This would effect how people would react to you. If you were an oread on the otherhand, it would so in line, since it is a magic item based on their race.

The Exchange 4/5 5/5

...and please see this thread for Mask of Stony Demeanor discussion.

Dark Archive

magical mask. razmirian mask worn over it, hides your face. razmirians do tend to wear their masks

or alter self, disguise self, or maybe even glamered clothing


While the "Razmiran Priest" sorcerer archetype was made specifically for the priests of Razmir, there is nothing in it that specifically requires you to be a priest of that religion. You could just as easily use the archetype to make up your own bogus religion instead of using someone else's.

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Peet wrote:
While the "Razmiran Priest" sorcerer archetype was made specifically for the priests of Razmir, there is nothing in it that specifically requires you to be a priest of that religion. You could just as easily use the archetype to make up your own bogus religion instead of using someone else's.

I don't think you are allowed to reflavor archetypes, there is a rather strict stance on reskinning in PFS.

That said, the archetype would make an excellent cleric of Aroden.

Shadow Lodge 4/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens Subscriber
Dylos wrote:
Peet wrote:
While the "Razmiran Priest" sorcerer archetype was made specifically for the priests of Razmir, there is nothing in it that specifically requires you to be a priest of that religion. You could just as easily use the archetype to make up your own bogus religion instead of using someone else's.

I don't think you are allowed to reflavor archetypes, there is a rather strict stance on reskinning in PFS.

That said, the archetype would make an excellent cleric of Aroden.

Reflavoring is not the same as reskinning. If you say "This is a greatsword" but you're wielding a Large Scimitar, that's not allowed. But if you want to be a Razmiran Priest, you don't have to worship him unless the book says you do (I don't own it so I don't know if it does restrict you there).

Shadow Lodge 1/5

The Morphling wrote:
Dylos wrote:
Peet wrote:
While the "Razmiran Priest" sorcerer archetype was made specifically for the priests of Razmir, there is nothing in it that specifically requires you to be a priest of that religion. You could just as easily use the archetype to make up your own bogus religion instead of using someone else's.

I don't think you are allowed to reflavor archetypes, there is a rather strict stance on reskinning in PFS.

That said, the archetype would make an excellent cleric of Aroden.

Reflavoring is not the same as reskinning. If you say "This is a greatsword" but you're wielding a Large Scimitar, that's not allowed. But if you want to be a Razmiran Priest, you don't have to worship him unless the book says you do (I don't own it so I don't know if it does restrict you there).

You are right, and the book doesn't restrict you. Dylos though is right in the sense that a few (rare in my experience but I suspect it varies by community) DMs might give you a hard time.

There are also a couple feats in the same book which would allow you to do many of the things a Razmirian cleric can do. Personally, I think the Bard is a better class to use for a 'false' cleric.

BTW, what is Razimer's favored weapon?

Sczarni 2/5

Kerney wrote:
The Morphling wrote:
Dylos wrote:
Peet wrote:
While the "Razmiran Priest" sorcerer archetype was made specifically for the priests of Razmir, there is nothing in it that specifically requires you to be a priest of that religion. You could just as easily use the archetype to make up your own bogus religion instead of using someone else's.

I don't think you are allowed to reflavor archetypes, there is a rather strict stance on reskinning in PFS.

That said, the archetype would make an excellent cleric of Aroden.

Reflavoring is not the same as reskinning. If you say "This is a greatsword" but you're wielding a Large Scimitar, that's not allowed. But if you want to be a Razmiran Priest, you don't have to worship him unless the book says you do (I don't own it so I don't know if it does restrict you there).

You are right, and the book doesn't restrict you. Dylos though is right in the sense that a few (rare in my experience but I suspect it varies by community) DMs might give you a hard time.

There are also a couple feats in the same book which would allow you to do many of the things a Razmirian cleric can do. Personally, I think the Bard is a better class to use for a 'false' cleric.

BTW, what is Razimer's favored weapon?

2 things: False focus and the 9th level power....they were pretty compelling (since a sorcerer normally has eschew materials, this works well anyway). The bard version didn't strike me as much...and I'll be honest I really wanted to use my Ifrit boon and he is an elementalist-fire (even though he has a vow of non-violence to living creatures). :)

Scarab Sages 2/5

Kerney wrote:
BTW, what is Razimer's favored weapon?

Whatever neccesary to get the job done, since he is the "False God".

Sczarni

The flavor of Razmirans can be fun at the table. I've always introduced my Razmiran Sorcerer as a "Priest of Razmir" which has led to some interesting confusion when the party asks me to heal. Though it is good practice to let the GM in on the joke before the session begins.

"Sorry Razmir does not grant his faithful the ability to channel" "why would you give that ability up?" "Because I'm a priest, not a cleric..." "But you just used Breath of Life on me?" "From a scroll!"

I invested heavily in UMD so I could disguise myself by using CLW wands, in addition to Infernal Healing. It's a good idea to keep both wands/spells handy just incase anyone objects to one or the other. (That and remember Infernal Healing is a 1 round cast while CLW is 1 standard). Chris Mortika has got the right idea on this one.

4/5

5 people marked this as a favorite.
Kerney wrote:
BTW, what is Razimer's favored weapon?

Fear.


redward wrote:
Kerney wrote:
BTW, what is Razimer's favored weapon?
Fear.

Surprise!

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Dylos wrote:
Peet wrote:
While the "Razmiran Priest" sorcerer archetype was made specifically for the priests of Razmir, there is nothing in it that specifically requires you to be a priest of that religion. You could just as easily use the archetype to make up your own bogus religion instead of using someone else's.

I don't think you are allowed to reflavor archetypes, there is a rather strict stance on reskinning in PFS.

That said, the archetype would make an excellent cleric of Aroden.

Not really. Arodens religion was the real deal and any true follower of Aroden would be sponsored by Iomedae. (although keep in mind he's been dead over a century and he was a Human god.. Humans aren't' that long lived that they would count a century as a trivial amount of time.

Razmir on the other hand is a fakir through and through and the archetype is built on that theme.

5/5 *

LazarX wrote:
Razmir on the other hand is a fakir through and through and the archetype is built on that theme.

There is still room to play with this theme though. My "paladin" of Razmir truly believes Razmir is a real deity, and a good all-around guy! I mean, everyone in Razmirian is so eager to give the priests of Razmir money all the time (he can't tell it's extortion/taxes)! He has seen the priests of Razmir heal the sick and mend the wounded (possible also inflicted by the same people)!

So he went off to the Pathfinder society to preach the good will of Razmir and convince everyone that he is a super good guy, and just misunderstood outside Razmirian. He doesn't understand why people keep saying he is a false god when he has seen all the miracles!

The Exchange 4/5 5/5

Belafon wrote:

I know of at least one "priest of Razmir" who has been around for a couple of years. The player (whose identity I will not reveal) is very much into the roleplaying side of things and his continual shouts of "For the Glory of Razmir!" have kept everyone greatly entertained. He play(ed) it at several local conventions and I never saw anyone get upset at his play style.

That said... he casts spells from his actual class, and never pretends they are anything else. Whenever anyone questions how a cleric has cast at least six spells that don't appear on the cleric spell list, his response is "The power of Razmir transcends a puny barrier of spell type! He grants ALL spells!"

Now that he has revealed himself I will confirm that I was talking about John Compton. Seriously, everyone should hear his snarling shouts about the power of Razmir. That voice more than anything convinces PCs and NPCs alike to believe. (I will also clarify that when I said "doesn't pretend his spells are anything else" I meant he doesn't try to make them act differently than what they do. I wish I could remember what he called his symbol of mirroring. "Symbol of Razmir" sounds too simplistic.)

But back to how to play such a character - it's really important to be a good gaming citizen. Make sure the GM is OK with what you intend to do. Take a step back after a little bit and see if you are dominating the table's time (and the other players would rather you didn't). If you happen to be with a player who refuses to accept your role-played castings and class abilities and demands that you "play correctly," dial it back (and more importantly encourage that player to roleplay her character more). Some people just won't be able to accept a priest of Razmir because they know the lore, know the books, and know that Razmir isn't a real deity. Although you are mechanically sound they will demand that you stop making your character something it isn't. It may not be you that's the direct cause of problems but if you can do something (roleplay less) to keep the table civil you probably should. Talk with her afterwards and point her at that blog post linked above where John discusses reflavoring that doesn't affect mechanics (it's OK).

I was in a scenario recently where it was clear the GM wasn't at all into my "watzit?" character. "He sees through your bluff." "Are you sure? You didn't ask me for my modifier." "Yes, you can't fool him." (and the next npc, and the next, etc.) Add in some pretty terrible acoustics in the room and subtlety was not very possible at that table. So I dropped the roleplaying to a minimum. Still interacted with PCs as I normally would but didn't push my "alternate features."

Community / Forums / Organized Play / Pathfinder Society / Razmiran Sorcerer All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.