|
I don't see where bringing race into it does anything except to obfuscate and add irrelevant, politically and emotionally-charged dimensions to the discussion.
You do not disadvantage a person by not hiring them; by that logic you are disadvantaging everybody in the world that you could employ, but do not.
You disadvantage a person by firing them, or otherwise costing them a job they already have.
Your arguments remind me of one of my favorite scenes from one of my all time favorite movies. I've quoted it below for your enjoyment.
Walter Sobchak: Am I wrong?
The Dude: No you're not wrong.
Walter Sobchak: Am I wrong?
The Dude: You're not wrong Walter. You're just an a+%!!%#.
Walter Sobchak: Okay then.
|
I now want to make a sumo based monk/brawler who performs 'coup de gras' on people. :-)I want to be able to perform coupe de villes on enemies but we don't have the rules for those yet. :(
Druid.
Fly over enemy in birdform
Shapshift into a huge earth elemental.
Should be the approximate weight and shape.
|
Something I would have loved to see (because this has been huge) is to see characters able to cast spells that protect them from the opposing alignment at +1 caster level. So a level 1 (for instructional purposes only)Lwful Good character might be able to cast a "Protection from Chaos" or "Protection fro Evil" spell as if they were level 2.
|
|
I have found season five causing me to be good with some of my characters more than they would be naturally. I have risked myself and given up resources for NPCs that in character I couldn't care less about, thinking it might be the secondary success condition. One way to think of this is that I am a metagaming SOB, the other way is that the characters just did it for the hopes of public acclaim.
|
My comparisons were strictly limited to the allowed PFS alignments. If you want to start a thread up discussing how unfairly evil is treated in PFS, be my guest.
The point in bringing up evil isn't to say they are treated unfairly. The objective is illustrating that good's polar opposite is not allowed to be used by players under any circumstances. It seems to me that if one side of the coin isn't allowed, the other side ought to expect some kind of bumps in the road that lie ahead of'em. So yeah, I kind of think the society may encourage neutrality in some very small ways. It is, as previously stated by myself and numerous others, a neutral organization. "Good" people join it knowing that they're going to be put in situations that they may find reprehensible, but that's just part of taking the red pill. Actually hm... I guess it isn't even PFS that encourages neutrality. If you think about it, these same issues arise in most home games. Would you object to a home game daring to make good characters have to actually act, gasp, good? Obligations of morality and honor are not always easily upheld.
Ah, and your question about holy smite/unholy blight: I've characters hit by holy smite at least three times. This is roughly equal to the number of times they've eaten a blight. I'm sure these numbers would be higher if I didn't play with a group of shameless optimizers like myself; most things don't live more than a round to be able to get off another.
All I'm gonna say is that somehow poisoning comes across as evil or at least not very nice, but poisoned people (in-game) still have a chance to live, time to seek healing.
But immolating an entire group of people with a fireball is somehow okay. Listening to the screams as their body's ignite, no problemo.
There are lots of double standards in the game, but people need to use their suspension of disbelief more actively, get into their character's head and not apply their own views and opinions to their characters, or the characters of the other players.
Except that one guy who always plays a TWF elf ranger. You KNOW there is no suspension of disbelief going on there...
|
My comparisons were strictly limited to the allowed PFS alignments. If you want to start a thread up discussing how unfairly evil is treated in PFS, be my guest.The point in bringing up evil isn't to say they are treated unfairly. The objective is illustrating that good's polar opposite is not allowed to be used by players under any circumstances. It seems to me that if one side of the coin isn't allowed, the other side ought to expect some kind of bumps in the road that lie ahead of'em. So yeah, I kind of think the society may encourage neutrality in some very small ways. It is, as previously stated by myself and numerous others, a neutral organization. "Good" people join it knowing that they're going to be put in situations that they may find reprehensible, but that's just part of taking the red pill. Actually hm... I guess it isn't even PFS that encourages neutrality. If you think about it, these same issues arise in most home games. Would you object to a home game daring to make good characters have to actually act, gasp, good? Obligations of morality and honor are not always easily upheld.
I have seen home campaigns where the DM rewarded good people much in the same way they are rewarded in real life and mythology, with good people being treated as heroes and respected and loved by one and all. They are awarded titles and medals for heroism, albeit sometimes posthumously. I don't see a lot of that in PFS.
Then again, I have also seen DM's that just love to torture players for choosing to play a good character. Fortunately, I haven't seen a lot of that in PFS either.
Ah, and your question about holy smite/unholy blight: I've characters hit by holy smite at least three times. This is roughly equal to the number of times they've eaten a blight. I'm sure these numbers would be higher if I didn't play with a group of shameless optimizers like myself; most things don't live more than a round to be able to get off another.
Interesting. I think I have been hit by something like half a dozen Unholy Blights in PFS but no Holy Smites. Of course, one is usually a choice the other is not. Still, there just aren't a lot of high level clerics in my area. The last one I played with died due to an Unholy Blight.
|
|
I have seen home campaigns where the DM rewarded good people much in the same way they are rewarded in real life and mythology, with good people being treated as heroes and respected and loved by one and all. They are awarded titles and medals for heroism, albeit sometimes posthumously. I don't see a lot of that in PFS.
Thats why you get Prestige and with it you get titles etc which give you mechanical bonuses to reflect that 'love'. So really, you are rewarded for your actions.
|
|
Thats why you get Prestige and with it you get titles etc which give you mechanical bonuses to reflect that 'love'. So really, you are rewarded for your actions.
I have seen home campaigns where the DM rewarded good people much in the same way they are rewarded in real life and mythology, with good people being treated as heroes and respected and loved by one and all. They are awarded titles and medals for heroism, albeit sometimes posthumously. I don't see a lot of that in PFS.
See my point regarding faction missions and Prestige in my original post.
|
|
See my point regarding faction missions and Prestige in my original post.
I saw it, I just haven't had the same experience. As there is almost always more than one way to get a task done, being Good hasn't been a problem. Sure it can be a little easier from time to time to be neutral, but not significant enough a difference for any of us to swap alignments for that alone.
Grand Lodge and Silver Crusade seem to be the easier fit for good, and to some extent LL wasn't too much hassle, but Chel and Sczarni walk a shaky road.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The sort of evil that cracks open Golarion and sets Rovagug loose on the world again.
Secretly in the bottom of the vault is a keyhole. The pathfinders know not what for but they try every key the come across. One day we shall open it and find...
Or alternatively!
Its just a hole. Just chuck all the artifacts into the hole and see what happens. Nothings happened yet, but its really fun to watch them go into the hole! Also any bodies found in the grand lodge faction missions are chucked into the hole.
Your arguments remind me of one of my favorite scenes from one of my all time favorite movies. I've quoted it below for your enjoyment.
Walter Sobchak: Am I wrong?
The Dude: No you're not wrong.
Walter Sobchak: Am I wrong?
The Dude: You're not wrong Walter. You're just an a&*@~#*.
Walter Sobchak: Okay then.
Well I try not to be (most of the time) and I'm sorry if it comes across that way.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The sort of evil that cracks open Golarion and sets Rovagug loose on the world again.Secretly in the bottom of the vault is a keyhole. The pathfinders know not what for but they try every key the come across. One day we shall open it and find...
Or alternatively!
Its just a hole. Just chuck all the artifacts into the hole and see what happens. Nothings happened yet, but its really fun to watch them go into the hole! Also any bodies found in the grand lodge faction missions are chucked into the hole.
I wish I could favorite this about thirty more times.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
While we're on the subject - what does PFS intend to do about its blatant favoring of elves and prejudice against non-elves? Non-elves' unusual vulnerability to Sleep effects and susceptibility to ghoul paralysis - combined with my inability to roleplay a non-elf as a treehugger - indicates a pattern of persecution against an entire class of players. If you take into account both the mechanical and roleplaying disadvantages, it becomes obvious that some scenarios, such as
are nearly unplayable for a non-elf.
I intend to investigate the feasibility of a class action suit against Paizo for violation of my civil rights. This is the greatest injustice since Hayes stole the 1876 election.
I intend to investigate the feasibility of a class action suit against Paizo for violation of my civil rights. This is the greatest injustice since Hayes stole the 1876 election.
I get the feeling your disagreeing with someone... but I can't read past the sarcasm and hyperbole well enough!
I get the feeling your disagreeing with someone... but I can't read past the sarcasm and hyperbole well enough!
Hyperbolic? Sarcastic? Moi?
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The sort of evil that cracks open Golarion and sets Rovagug loose on the world again.Secretly in the bottom of the vault is a keyhole. The pathfinders know not what for but they try every key the come across. One day we shall open it and find...
Or alternatively!
Its just a hole. Just chuck all the artifacts into the hole and see what happens. Nothings happened yet, but its really fun to watch them go into the hole! Also any bodies found in the grand lodge faction missions are chucked into the hole.
Alas, if only the heroes of the Aspis Consortium had been able to stop them in time.
Alas, if only the heroes of the Aspis Consortium had been able to stop them in time.
Don't worry, some roving band of a Theif-Fighter-Wizard-Cleric sort of paradigm will stumble upon their plot and stop them eventually. That's how things work around here!
I always wondered what would happen if we were part of a good organization with clear and apparent heads and lovable leaders instead of a morally ambiguous and shady organization...
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Alas, if only the heroes of the Aspis Consortium had been able to stop them in time.Don't worry, some roving band of a Theif-Fighter-Wizard-Cleric sort of paradigm will stumble upon their plot and stop them eventually. That's how things work around here!
I always wondered what would happen if we were part of a good organization with clear and apparent heads and lovable leaders instead of a morally ambiguous and shady organization...
Lots of people like me getting bored and quitting. :P
Lots of people like me getting bored and quitting. :P
Its about what you get away with sometimes. Its not like the society is keeping good tabs on you anyway... Maybe. Wait, no, probably not. Otherwise they could've gotten that guy to get the corpse, or at least told me where it was more exactly.
|
|
3. Morally Questionable Orders While faction missions no longer work like they used to...
Always playing Good characters myself, I agree. There seem to be a number of mechanical & thematic shifts in Season 5 that aren't sitting right with me (Perhaps it's the influence of "The Year of The Demon"?).
That said, I'm making the best of it (for the love of PFS), and think what you have done here is a positive step. As customers we need to sound-off with feedback (as well as those out there who like these shifts) so Paizo can weigh it all and see what changes stick and which ones go.
|
|
Spot on about morally questionable orders.
Me and my group played In Service to Lore.
3 of the 4 characters were LG, 1 was NG. We included an Inquisitor (me) and a Cleric. And a Bard who was an aspiring Paladin.
Most of the group straight-up refused to help the Chelish countess and the Sczarni fence. It was only because the GM hinted and my PC was an Absolom native who knew the value of realpolitik that we did those missions at all. Didn't get any treasure from the Sczarni aside from the one item he asked for as we saw that as theft.
Quite frustrating. Very easy adventure though.
|
|
Most of the group straight-up refused to help the Chelish countess and the Sczarni fence. It was only because the GM hinted and my PC was an Absolom native who knew the value of realpolitik that we did those missions at all. Didn't get any treasure from the Sczarni aside from the one item he asked for as we saw that as theft.
...except you could have chosen not to help one of them and still passed with flying colours, and what you perceived was a theft actually wasn't, so that sort of handballs things back to you guys. You had made assumptions, and incorrect ones at that - so how is that the Decemvirates fault?
|
|
I personally play almost exclussively good characters and I have not really had any issues with PFS.
I have found though, that to my annoyance, if I am playing with a Neutral character, they inevitably turn out to be a blank faced dice roller. That is my only prejudice to neutral characters, simply because in my experience they are often the most boring to play with in and out of character. Not always, but a good deal of the time.
I also strive to keep myself good, including holding party members back, one example being:
I really try to go against the murder hoboing, and I often advocate for taking prisoners or talking down enemies more than fighting them or killing them. I have had multiple chances for Coup De Grace and have never once taken it and I am a Neutral Good. Granted my character is also a Sarenite
PFS is Neutral, but I have never been offset by that except when it involved other players. Yes, Unholy Blight and Smite good are horrible....but god characters have Holy Smite, and Smite Evil anyways.
|
|
Spot on about morally questionable orders.
Me and my group played In Service to Lore.
3 of the 4 characters were LG, 1 was NG. We included an Inquisitor (me) and a Cleric. And a Bard who was an aspiring Paladin.
Most of the group straight-up refused to help the Chelish countess and the Sczarni fence. It was only because the GM hinted and my PC was an Absolom native who knew the value of realpolitik that we did those missions at all. Didn't get any treasure from the Sczarni aside from the one item he asked for as we saw that as theft.
Quite frustrating. Very easy adventure though.
You're not supposed to be helping the Chelish paracountess. You're there to get the maguffin from her and bring it back to the Grand Lodge. No help implied.
As a GM, I usually point out that the Sczarni guy is technically the legal owner of the maguffin so that lawful characters at least have a chance there. There are still a lot of other legal gray areas involved in that mission, and sometimes that's enough for the lawful characters to refuse, but there is at least some justification for the retrieval.
|
|
The problem with showing neutrality is that it looks like your character just don't give a damn about the other characters you're interacting with, which looks an awful lot like the players that don't give a damn about the npcs.
Showing Neutrality? Most nations are neutral, so being a fairly normal Taldoran, Osirion, or Qadiran would all be showing neutrality.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
How are the rest of you maintaining your Neutral alignment?
I don't know, its a hard road. As you say, we keep fighting Demons and Devils and putting an end to marauding undead. We tend to take prisoners and act like reasonably well balanced people - when handed morally ambiguous problems we try look at the issue from a few angles and see if there is a reasonable and decent path - with an open mind rather than through the polar Good/Evil binary prism, and as we generally do care about something even if it is just Sczarni principles of 'family' or quasi-Viking Ulfen honour we struggle along trying to simply be reasonable people - we just aren't arbitrarily tied to acting only one way - but with all the good we keep doing as a byproduct of adventuring (saving towns from demons and stopping Evil more days than not) our GM's keep suggesting we are committing alignment infractions and we are on our warning to rein in our behaviour or be forced into goodness. We look after each other too much too, we think that any sentient and sensible creature would look after their team mates well even if only out of self-interest - many hands/light load etc, but no one is buying, apparently to be neutral you have to be a self centered a-hat.
Does Aunty Baltwin have any more jobs going? We are kinda worried.
FML.
|
|
Hey Ya....
Lemtwist Bratham Mallentwine Flannelfoot Smyth Olgen Jeebs Nathers Bingham the Third here...
I recently turned neutral because of a particular item I recovered recently, it whirls around my head and keeps me awake at night as it continually hits my pillow.
Something in me doesn't want to atone for it, as that usually means I would lose the bennies for the item itself, and I used it to buffer a disadvantage I had during that same adventure.
Used to, I would be all for the good things and be right with the guy in the sparkly armor and nifty shields. Now, I sorta shrug my shoulders and go "eh, whatever. Go tank."
And last time I checked, Good characters get an entire class to themself (Paladin) while there is no other PFS-legal class that excludes Good.Firstly, Good characters don't get a class to themselves. Only Lawful Good characters do. How does that compensate CG & NG?
Secondly, while LG gains Paladin it loses Druid & Barbarian.
Semantics aside, the point remains that if you tally up the classes available to Good and non-Good characters (excluding Evil in case of PFS), Good has one more Class available, even if only a subset of Good have access to it. Same goes for the Good Domain stuff I mentioned, which you ignored.
Plus cases like Holy Smite where Neutral characters will ALWAYS be negatively affected by certain attacks (spells), but Good characters would be Immune. Similarly, Good characters are benefited by certain effects that don't apply or are weaker for Neutral characters (e.g. Celestial Sorceror's Heavenly Fire). Obviously, if there is no Good characters in the group of PCs, you are much less likely to run into those. Last I checked, Good PFS characters exist, and in fact are granted EXPANDED MECHANICAL OPTIONS (e.g. Good Domain) which in fact corresponds to the ability to cast such Good Cleric spells. Whether or not said spell damages all enemies and no allies, or damages enemies and partially damages allies is pretty significant in it's power, and negatively impacts the desirability of being a Neutral character in such a group.
Monsters have vastly more options available than PCs do, so I would say that Unholy Blight would be encountered proportionately less often than Holy Smite is... Of course, monsters are probably disproportinately Evil more than Neutral, so Unholy Blight might show up more often... Obviously if you never play with a Good Cleric/Oracle in your group you won't often encounter Holy Smite, but that is explicitly giving up a specific advantage of Goodness. Variable composition of PC party just isn't comparable to variability in encounters. Also a factor in not seeing Holy Smite in play may be that Neutral PCs are in play, which causes the Good Cleric to choose another spell instead. Which just means that Neutral characters are reducing the options/power of Good characters.
When you remove from consideration the advantages from one side of a comparison, it tends to look disadvantageous. Shocking.
|
Personally, I think that Neutral Characters should be treated as both alignments (along which ever scale(s) they are neutral on) for all Alignment effects, with the exception of Smite Evil/Good and Detect Good/Evil/Chaos/Law, rather than be treated as neither. Because they are not truly the alignment be targeted, anytime they get a Save vs an ability that targets them due to Alignment (unless they have that alignment), they get a +2 on the save, but otherwise potentially suffer the affects fully.
So a LN character is considered both LG and LE, but would only detect as Lawful and would not be subject to Smite Evil (unless they are thinking bad things).
Additionally, Divine casters must actually have the Alignment in order to cast any Alignment spells, and if not, those spells are treated as not on their class spell list. Arcane casters can, but if they cast like a Wizard those spells are automatically treated as spells from opposition schools (or double if they actually are also from the opposition school), while those that cast as a Sorcerer automatically treat their caster level as -2 (min 0, not 1, meaning might not be able to cast at all) if they don't actually have that alignment.
The trade off is that Neutral characters, as far as player options, still have the upper hand. Divine casters still get the option that Good or Evil ones have picked for them (Channel positive/negative Energy, Cure/Inflict or whatever), while Arcane casters can still learn and use all of them. There is no special mechanical benefit for being Neutral, but they still have all of the out of game appeal such as allowing them to act more or less freely and like "real people" access to almost all classes
It sounds like just changing the rules for Alignment descriptor spells would achieve what you want,
without the hassle of creating some new rule with only the few explicit exceptions you give it, which may not prove adequate for every case.
It's simple and not open-ended-problematic to require Divine Casters to have the Alignment of Alignment Descriptor spells, and Arcane who don't must use Double Slots.
Perhaps there could be a more 'Neutral' version of Protection from Evil/Good that anybody can cast 'no problem', but it would be weaker.
The Neutral version wouldn't have the Immunity vs. Summoned Creatures aspect, or the general AC and Save boost,
but would retain the specific mind-control protection, which would apply vs. all mind-control, regardless of source alignment?
|
|
And last time I checked, Good characters get an entire class to themself (Paladin) while there is no other PFS-legal class that excludes Good.Firstly, Good characters don't get a class to themselves. Only Lawful Good characters do. How does that compensate CG & NG?
Secondly, while LG gains Paladin it loses Druid & Barbarian.Semantics aside, the point remains that if you tally up the classes available to Good and non-Good characters (excluding Evil in case of PFS), Good has one more Class available, even if only a subset of Good have access to it. Same goes for the Good Domain stuff I mentioned, which you ignored.
Plus cases like Holy Smite where Neutral characters will ALWAYS be negatively affected by certain attacks (spells), but Good characters would be Immune. Similarly, Good characters are benefited by certain effects that don't apply or are weaker for Neutral characters (e.g. Celestial Sorceror's Heavenly Fire). Obviously, if there is no Good characters in the group of PCs, you are much less likely to run into those. Last I checked, Good PFS characters exist, and in fact are granted EXPANDED MECHANICAL OPTIONS (e.g. Good Domain) which in fact corresponds to the ability to cast such Good Cleric spells. Whether or not said spell damages all enemies and no allies, or damages enemies and partially damages allies is pretty significant in it's power, and negatively impacts the desirability of being a Neutral character in such a group.
Monsters have vastly more options available than PCs do, so I would say that Unholy Blight would be encountered proportionately less often than Holy Smite is... Of course, monsters are probably disproportinately Evil more than Neutral, so Unholy Blight might show up more often... Obviously if you never play with a Good Cleric/Oracle in your group you won't often encounter Holy Smite, but that is explicitly giving up a specific advantage of Goodness. Variable composition of PC party just isn't comparable to...
When you look only at how things work on paper while ignoring the reality of the situation, things look balanced. Shocking..
For example, while neutral characters may be equally affected by Holy Smite and Unholy Blight, Holy Smite is not really a serious danger to Neutral PCs. I haven't seen an adventure yet that had an NPC drop it on the party so that really only leaves getting hit by your own party members. While it is possible this might be a common occurrence depending on party make-up, since it is thrown by people who actually don't want to kill you with it and there is a non-PVP rule in PFS, then it is unlikely it will actually ever be a serious threat to your character even if you get hit by it every time you play. Unholy Blight on the other hand is thrown by enemies that do want to kill you and that aren't restricted by the PvP rules.
|
|
Perhaps there could be a more 'Neutral' version of Protection from Evil/Good that anybody can cast 'no problem', but it would be weaker.
The Neutral version wouldn't have the Immunity vs. Summoned Creatures aspect, or the general AC and Save boost,
but would retain the specific mind-control protection, which would apply vs. all mind-control, regardless of source alignment?
That would probably be a good idea, though I'm not sure about the Summoned Creatures part. Part of the point is to remove the mechanical bias against Neutral characters (mostly players). At the same time, I am looking to make it fair, (and not simply reverse who gets the extra benefit).
OK, taking Holy Smight/Blight out, that leaves the expanded mechanical options of Good (Classes, Domains, Feats, other options).
And that Good characters don't have the potential need for an Atonement.
If the argument is that they may not fulfill ALL Factions' Missions as often (some Factions are fine),
thus having less Prestige (unless they chose a good faction), not having to spend Prestige on something (Atonement) seems pretty relevant, doesn't it?
And if you've spent all your Prestige, then sorry, but you can't buy that Atonement, your character is just perma-banned.
There is no special mechanical benefit for being Neutral, but they still have all of the out of game appeal such as allowing them to act more or less freely and like "real people" access to almost all classesWell, what you previously wrote in fact alludes to the exact mechanical advantage that Neutrals would get per your original proposal:
The trade off is that Neutral characters, as far as player options, still have the upper hand. Divine casters still get the option that Good or Evil ones have picked for them (Channel positive/negative Energy, Cure/Inflict or whatever), while Arcane casters can still learn and use all of them.
Neutrals can cast BOTH versions, while either version also works vs. Neutrals. This is part of why I proposed NOT changing the status of Neutral to count as both Good and Evil in general, and my proposed weaker Neutral Protection spell was in fact weaker. By your original proposal, you are DOUBLING the utility of Protection from Evil/Good spells for Evil/Good Casters (also applying vs. Neutrals, i.e. now it applies against practically any encounter in an AP, rather than just 80% of them). Neutrals could cast both versions and be Immune to mind-control and Aligned Summons from ANY SOURCE/Alignment. That's a significant advantage for Neutrals.
|
|
OK, taking Holy Smight/Blight out, that leaves the expanded mechanical options of Good (Classes, Domains, Feats, other options).
And that Good characters don't have the potential need for an Atonement.
If the argument is that they may not fulfill ALL Factions' Missions as often (some Factions are fine),
thus having less Prestige (unless they chose a good faction), not having to spend Prestige on something (Atonement) seems pretty relevant, doesn't it?
And if you've spent all your Prestige, then sorry, but you can't buy that Atonement, your character is just perma-banned.
Again, the reality, at least in my experience, doesn't work that way. Most people want to keep whatever alignment they have for their character because it is part of their concept of the character. So, again, in my experience, how far they have to slide is irrelevant because they are going to have an Atonement cast either way. Obviously that isn't always going to be the case, but it does diminish the benefit.