I'll be leaving out any specific references to any adventures. No spoilers, just questions. I'm sure this comes up in a dozen adventures anyways, its just to darn fun as a DM.
So an evil outsider offers to grant twisted wishes so long as they are your heart's desire. Ultimately these wishes are true in a way, though they often come at great cost to others who may not understand.
A paladin wishes to restore a region to its pre-evil state and wishes it so from the outsider. The wish is granted though the paladin is presented with a knife to spill the blood of an innocent to a nature creature that will rekindle natural growth, which in theory could remove much of the taint. He refuses to spill the blood and the wish ultimately fails because of it.
Is it evil to make a wish knowing well that the consequences could be dire, even though those consequences are not known beforehand? Should he become unlawful for making a deal with a being of such chaos? Should he at least become neutral for his wish? Or would you let it slide since he didn't follow through.
Typically I regard evil actions as conscious choices, even if the outcomes are unclear. Intention over effect. Agree or Disagree and why?
That depends on whether he knows all of this before he makes the wish.
If you know the creature is evil and will taint the wish, then you would know the end outcome for the evil creature is better than any reward you see on the surface, so while I can't say it is evil across the board I do see it as very unwise across the board. I can also see how it can be evil since the harm caused by a glabrezu, as an example, will cause suffering, and you knew that much before you even made the wish.
You might wish to be the best weaponsmith ever. The demon grants you the wish, then uses one of your weapons to start/support a war that kills millions. Since your weapon is far superior when supplied to an army than anything else. This war might not take place until 50 years after you die, but without your wish it may not have even been possible.
Short version: I generally go with intent also, but a lack of obvious poor judgement might be an exception. I can't see a paladin being that naive, as to trust a demon, knowing that it is a demon.
Set had an interesting take on it, here, which I find incredibly interesting.
In it, he posits that the fiend in question will, in fact, grant the wish - twist the wish - to be the best it can possibly be for the mortal.
But, and here's the thing, people are going to know. It's going to get out. That the entity in question made a deal with demons.
And when that happens... well, it's just too tempting for others to do so as well, isn't it?
As far as the Paladin's actions, he sought a way to fix something. When the cost for that fix was revealed (an evil method), he said, "No".
There is nothing wrong with consorting with evil for good ends, but if those good ends require doing evil deeds, that's where the Paladin draws the line... which this one did.
Personally, if it were up to me, I'd have summoned any archon at all (at least, any teleporting archon), and tasked them with getting a Solar all up in this biz to use their wish-power to fix things. That may require a degree of knowledge the Paladin doesn't have however...
In this specific case, the paladin and party believe the Outsider is a greater demon, a specific one that is immensly powerful and known to corrupt those of good alignment. They have been warned about the creature, though the consequences are mostly unknown. They know it is evil per detect evil.
In this instance wishing to be the best weaponsmith [ever], would likely cause the best weaponsmith to have a heart attack and die, while the wisher might find the dead smith's smithing hammer that gives them a +10 smithing or something around a level 15-20 power level. Or the wisher to gain some kind of megalomania disorder as far as smithing. These wishes are true to the user, mosty.
So it's more like Dragon Age demons, where the "granted wishes" are basically just a fantasy land that the person wastes away in (unless said demon effectively fills the body with another demon, making an abomination, but that's a whole 'nother kettle of fish)?
For the curious amongst us, I'm listing the particulars of the situation. I will spoiler all the specifics because my question was very general, but the situation is very specific.
@Tacticslion that is one of the outcomes that would be on target with the track of the adventure. The wish has to be twisted as to pervert it into the worst possible scenario. Though the wisher is probably unaware of the true consequences.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
"Yes, bargain with me and there is a moral price. Evil will be committed. Your soul will be tainted and there will be consequences of using my Power. But the Wishes I grant have great Power to effect a bargainer's desire. They can achieve results that are otherwise beyond you. A villain will bargain for selfish or evil ends and heap evil upon Evil. But it need not be so with you. You would choose what to bargain for. So ask yourself paladin, is there an important Good you want accomplished? A great Evil you need stopped that you are willing to pay the Price for? There are so many wrongs that need righting, so many evils in the world. This is a chance to make a difference. Are you not willing to sacrifice yourself to do great Good? When it comes down to it, is that not your duty?"
@Voadam I think I need to copy that quote for him to say next game, that's gold.
@wraithstrike
I... disagree with that adventure's take on alignment in the last spoiler, James.
Otherwise, good to know. I'll need to think on it some more.
First things first: One action does NOT cause an alignment shift, no matter what. Alignment changes are gradual, reflecting a change in your actions over a period of time. So, no, no alignment change just for doing one thing.
I've really enjoyed the adventure, I think the alignment thing in the spoilers falls into the area of "committed", but I'm also very lenient on alignments.
For instance, people ask me what I expect of a paladin. I usually just say, you can be rude, but you can't be cruel. You can be violent, but you can't torture. That's usually about it, which probably doesn't fit 80% of other DM's out there.
To the original question, I was just wondering if openly dealing with evil outsiders is usually a no-no for others. To reference Voadam and a webcomic I read there is a quote, something like - Tell a mortal you will steal their soul and they will fight you with every once of their being, tell them they can give it to you to save someone else and they will fight you for the chance.
@Zhayne, just saw your post jump in. Just to add more discussion, since returning the paladin is contemplating using the Granter of Wishes again to effect more changes he wants, since he ended up with some benefits, but yet doesn't realize the negative consequences he caused.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Set had an interesting take on it, here, which I find incredibly interesting.
In it, he posits that the fiend in question will, in fact, grant the wish - twist the wish - to be the best it can possibly be for the mortal.
..A demon is a demon. It is it's nature to corrupt and destroy, if it brings a benefit in the short run, it'll be at the price of making things twice as awful in the long run. If a demon is granting a wish it'll be one of the Monkey's Paw variety. (look it up)
If you're talking about a Demon being sincerely Mr. Nice Guy, then you're strictly in homerule off base territory and the person to ask is the GM who's stretching rules so far. Because this setup is so far outside the Pathfinder baseline as to have no common ground for discussion.
You... didn't actually read either my post (that you only quoted part of) or the post I linked, did you?
@James: see, that's exactly what I'm talking about (and what Set meant). He got good stuff, and there was no apparent problem with it. So now he goes back. Again. And again. Recall that summoning evil creatures is, in fact, evil. And if he's dealing with them for other-than-extraordinary circumstances... well... that's going against his code. Like, explicitly.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
To me it seems like the "Demon" is getting the best end of the deal. Yes the paladin feels vindicated that he did no wrong, but his love is distracting him from his duty and the deaths he inadvertently caused further the creature's goals. Furthermore the paladin is obliviously happy about the results and desires to wish again.
Now from the way I said that it sounds really bad. He's an ignorant pawn who keeps going back. I'm almost debating having him get some kind of warning to stop and to allude to the catastrophic damage he is setting in motion. I know that the player OOC doesn't see anything wrong with what happened and when he finds out eventually about the cascade he's causing will be suprised at best.
I think his "warning" might be the loss of his abilities for a short time, but I'd rather be subtle about it. I'm curious if people think that is going to far? That'd be like someone hinting to the paladin that he is meddling in things he doesn't quite understand.
Edit: In character he was preaching at the dwarven fighter that the creature is evil and he's trying to trick them, but he still went through with it. It's hypocritical and a few of the other party members noticed.
To me it seems like the "Demon" is getting the best end of the deal. Yes the paladin feels vindicated that he did no wrong, but his love is distracting him from his duty and the deaths he inadvertently caused further the creature's goals. Furthermore the paladin is obliviously happy about the results and desires to wish again.
Now from the way I said that it sounds really bad. He's an ignorant pawn who keeps going back. I'm almost debating having him get some kind of warning to stop and to allude to the catastrophic damage he is setting in motion. I know that the player OOC doesn't see anything wrong with what happened and when he finds out eventually about the cascade he's causing will be suprised at best.
I think his "warning" might be the loss of his abilities for a short time, but I'd rather be subtle about it. I'm curious if people think that is going to far? That'd be like someone hinting to the paladin that he is meddling in things he doesn't quite understand.
Edit: In character he was preaching at the dwarven fighter that the creature is evil and he's trying to trick them, but he still went through with it. It's hypocritical and a few of the other party members noticed.
Are there any caster in the party to make knowledge checks and inform the paladin that whatever good he causes the resulting evil will be twice as bad or more? These creatures live for thousands of years so just because the paladin can't see the end game, or it wont take affect until he is dead hundreds of years from now, bargaining with them will hurt(and that is putting it mildly) someone later on, and it will be on a much larger scale than the help his wish caused.
Now if he knows this and does it anyway, then he is being selfish and I would say evil knowing helping a demon further whatever plans it has. The act was one of selfishness since the victim was willing, and not for the greater good so he should have lost his powers. If he was duped into somehow thinking saving the girl would help others and that is why he made the deal, then an atonement would be all I would require as a GM, even though the end result might be the same.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
To me it seems like the "Demon" is getting the best end of the deal. Yes the paladin feels vindicated that he did no wrong, but his love is distracting him from his duty and the deaths he inadvertently caused further the creature's goals. Furthermore the paladin is obliviously happy about the results and desires to wish again.
Now from the way I said that it sounds really bad. He's an ignorant pawn who keeps going back. I'm almost debating having him get some kind of warning to stop and to allude to the catastrophic damage he is setting in motion. I know that the player OOC doesn't see anything wrong with what happened and when he finds out eventually about the cascade he's causing will be suprised at best.
I think his "warning" might be the loss of his abilities for a short time, but I'd rather be subtle about it. I'm curious if people think that is going to far? That'd be like someone hinting to the paladin that he is meddling in things he doesn't quite understand.
Edit: In character he was preaching at the dwarven fighter that the creature is evil and he's trying to trick them, but he still went through with it. It's hypocritical and a few of the other party members noticed.
Exactly.
The (well-done) wish is the Opener.
Like any good casino, they'll let you win a few - maybe quite a few - until you get addicted. Until you need it. And then you're theirs.
The best part? As the things spread, more and more will come to them. You got all you desired. All that you desired. Sure, you were damned, but you don't have to know that. And neither does anyone else!
Especially as this creature is neutral evil, he doesn't feel the need to point out the fine print, the fact that there is fine print, or even print the fine print.
Instead, he'll just go merrily along and once the Paladin makes the wishes - that end up being great for the Paladin, really - the evil just gets what it wants to.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Just from my perspective, unrelated to the AP in question, a Paladin who makes a conscious "deal with a demon" has most likely violated his code and should probably atone. The fact that he didn't carry out the wish was a good start, since it was clearly evil what was expected. That he was tempted to use that evil power is the big thing he did wrong. It was a "quick and easy" fix, and isn't that what Tempting Evil is ultimately? His alignment shouldn't change, he's still a good guy, but he's violated a pretty strong and basic tenent of his faith.
Remember, this was a wish to make things easier, not simply working alongside evil for the greater good. (For example, working with the evil Tyrant to destroy an evil army of Orcs about to kill innocent villagers).
That's my two cents anyway, if you want to say that he's fine because he changed his mind at the last minute, that works too, just depends on how strict you want your paladins to be.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
"No. You are a fiend, demon, and anything you grant will do more evil than good."
"That is a possibility you should consider paladin. If that is the case then morally you should not bargain with me or you will cause more evil than good in the world from your actions. A reasonable fear that could stop you from accepting my offer to do great good and stop great evil. I could tell you it is not so but you have no reason to believe a fiend.
"But if it is not so, if the evil consequences are less than the good you can do, then turning down my offer allows more evil to go unchecked in the world, more good to be left undone. Then rejecting the offer is rejecting the opportunity to do good and rejecting the opportunity to bind me to do good. If that is the case then morally you should bargain with me. Do good, or set my evil power against other evils in the world and accomplish much to make the world a better place if your goal as a paladin is to do good.
"But there remains the possibility that in attempting to do great good you will do more evil. No option here offers you certainty that you are ultimately doing the right thing. Such is life.
"So do you do nothing and safeguard your own purity but allow so much evil in the world to thrive as you turn down the chance to do something significant about it? Or do you risk the consequences of trying to do great good?"
And this is why I come to the forums, ha!
Yeah I imagine its going to be something like,
"Yes, good paladin you have bested me. Yet I am trapped here and cannot stop you. The old magics of this place force me into your service, I must grant your wishes, what now is your heart's desire?"
"No. You are a fiend, demon, and anything you grant will do more evil than good."
"That is a possibility you should consider paladin. If that is the case then morally you should not bargain with me or you will cause more evil than good in the world from your actions. A reasonable fear that could stop you from accepting my offer to do great good and stop great evil. I could tell you it is not so but you have no reason to believe a fiend.
"But if it is not so, if the evil consequences are less than the good you can do, then turning down my offer allows more evil to go unchecked in the world, more good to be left undone. Then rejecting the offer is rejecting the opportunity to do good and rejecting the opportunity to bind me to do good. If that is the case then morally you should bargain with me. Do good, or set my evil power against other evils in the world and accomplish much to make the world a better place if your goal as a paladin is to do good.
"But there remains the possibility that in attempting to do great good you will do more evil. No option here offers you certainty that you are ultimately doing the right thing. Such is life.
"So do you do nothing and safeguard your own purity but allow so much evil in the world to thrive as you turn down the chance to do something significant about it? Or do you risk the consequences of trying to do great good?"
"My only wish would be your absolute and total destruction such that even the memory of you would fade from every being and record. But even then I fear the price would be too high."
"You would have me throw away the certainty of my purity for the chance of good, but my purity if not for my own sake. It is dedicated to my Goddess and the cause of Good. It is to balance and oppose the Evil of others. It is not mine to give."
"I have much Good left to do. I will not gamble that Good away on a rigged game."