Book 5: Discussion on Iomedae [SPOILERS AHOY!]


Wrath of the Righteous

401 to 450 of 526 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | next > last >>

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
TOZ wrote:
Tangent101 wrote:
You know, something constructive.
On a messageboard?

Yes. Your attitude is what leads to boards like the Den.


That is the joke...


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Odraude wrote:
That is the joke...

Nonetheless it helps to make this attitude more likely to be taken as the norm.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook Subscriber
magnuskn wrote:
TOZ wrote:
Tangent101 wrote:
You know, something constructive.
On a messageboard?
Yes. Your attitude is what leads to boards like the Den.

It's why I like the Megatokyo forum boards - at least, the two parts of it I keep an eye on (Story Discussions and SD Fanworks). Even when we disagree, things remain interesting and enjoyable. Most of the time! ^^;;

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Tangent101 wrote:
magnuskn wrote:
TOZ wrote:
Tangent101 wrote:
You know, something constructive.
On a messageboard?
Yes. Your attitude is what leads to boards like the Den.
It's why I like the Megatokyo forum boards - at least, the two parts of it I keep an eye on (Story Discussions and SD Fanworks). Even when we disagree, things remain interesting and enjoyable. Most of the time! ^^;;

To be fair this current topic included the words: alignment, lawfull good, paladin, torture and kidnapping. The fact that most of us managed to remain relatively civil is a very impressive thing indeed.

Shadow Lodge

Tangent101 wrote:
It's why I like the Megatokyo forum boards

Ah, my first internet home...


You know I was just going back over this more thoroughly as part of my run through and I noticed this . . .

Iomedae can, of course, do anything she wants to the PCs, but she doesn't-she values them and what they mean to the crusade too much to deliberately antagonize them, even if she were interested in doing so (which she is not). If the PCs include worshipers of deities opposed to her, she still understands that as a group they are, perhaps, the Fifth Crusade's greatest and most powerful weapon.

Really she values them and what they mean to the crusade too much to deliberately antagonize them yet she hits them with multiple D6 of damage if they don't answer her questions correctly?


captain yesterday wrote:
Liam Warner wrote:

You know I was just going back over this more thoroughly as part of my run through and I noticed this . . .

Iomedae can, of course, do anything she wants to the PCs, but she doesn't-she values them and what they mean to the crusade too much to deliberately antagonize them, even if she were interested in doing so (which she is not). If the PCs include worshipers of deities opposed to her, she still understands that as a group they are, perhaps, the Fifth Crusade's greatest and most powerful weapon.

Really she values them and what they mean to the crusade too much to deliberately antagonize them yet she hits them with multiple D6 of damage if they don't answer her questions correctly?

WE DON'T CARE ANYMORE GIVE IT UP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

IOMODAE IS EVEN SICK OF HEARING THIS CONVERSATION!

Nobody is forcing you to read the thread.


captain yesterday wrote:
Liam Warner wrote:

You know I was just going back over this more thoroughly as part of my run through and I noticed this . . .

Iomedae can, of course, do anything she wants to the PCs, but she doesn't-she values them and what they mean to the crusade too much to deliberately antagonize them, even if she were interested in doing so (which she is not). If the PCs include worshipers of deities opposed to her, she still understands that as a group they are, perhaps, the Fifth Crusade's greatest and most powerful weapon.

Really she values them and what they mean to the crusade too much to deliberately antagonize them yet she hits them with multiple D6 of damage if they don't answer her questions correctly?

WE DON'T CARE ANYMORE GIVE IT UP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

IOMODAE IS EVEN SICK OF HEARING THIS CONVERSATION!

I have bad news mate...

"points at title of the thread"

That is what the topic is about. That's like walking into a paladin alignment thread and complaining that people are talking about a paladin alignment in a paladin alignment thread.

Also, good to put things in all caps. It's cruise control for cool.

Shadow Lodge

Alleran wrote:
captain yesterday wrote:
Liam Warner wrote:

You know I was just going back over this more thoroughly as part of my run through and I noticed this . . .

Iomedae can, of course, do anything she wants to the PCs, but she doesn't-she values them and what they mean to the crusade too much to deliberately antagonize them, even if she were interested in doing so (which she is not). If the PCs include worshipers of deities opposed to her, she still understands that as a group they are, perhaps, the Fifth Crusade's greatest and most powerful weapon.

Really she values them and what they mean to the crusade too much to deliberately antagonize them yet she hits them with multiple D6 of damage if they don't answer her questions correctly?

WE DON'T CARE ANYMORE GIVE IT UP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

IOMODAE IS EVEN SICK OF HEARING THIS CONVERSATION!
Nobody is forcing you to read the thread.

This. Use your damn hide button.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

>Kidnapping
Has anyone actually considered that if a PC isn't interested in playing along with Iomedae, they could simply say, 'thanks, but no thanks' and ask to be returned to the Material Plane? There's nothing that says she isn't willing to let one of them pass if they don't think they are up for it. I doubt she would send anyone who wasn't willing to even sit through her interview. Nothing says you can't opt out.
Also, it mentions she brings them to Heaven when the players start to get restless or look for other things to do, so it's not like they weren't already interested in the next step of the war. That's a big giant clue on what they're to do next.

>Torture
As mortals within the divine realm, maybe the sonic damage is just a side effect. Mortals were not meant to hear the glorious sounds of the Gods orchestra. Ever seen that scene in 'Dogma'? It's like that.

And if you think 20D6 Sonic is bad, maybe you don't have what it takes to face the raw forces of the Abyss.

Honestly, if you have a group of PCs that mouth off to a goddess or attack her, they deserve exactly what happens to them. I'm from an old school group and all of them agree, you sit down and you shut up when a God talks. Any PC not showing proper deference, followed by an expectation of courageous or self assured actions, is gonna get it.

Any group not willing to show proper respect to a Goddess has a serious case of their own prideful self worth, a weakness the Abyss will quickly use to destroy them. Consider the PCs got their Mythic from the Wardstones which were placed by Iomedae. They owe her all of their strength and their actions should reflect it.

As for the penalty for the questions, maybe if they don't answer to Iomedae's expectations, the trumpets are a more visceral test? If they can survive the wrath of heaven's chorus, perhaps they have what it takes to suffer through the torments of the Abyss?

Honestly, I think this whole debate comes from New School players unable to play through an Old School scenario. People who are whining about a Goddess not treating them the way they think they should be treated are just the entitled types of adventurers she would not rely on and would pass for better bringers of her will and might.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
LordOfThreshold wrote:
Honestly, I think this whole debate comes from New School players unable to play through an Old School scenario. People who are whining about a Goddess not treating them the way they think they should be treated are just the entitled types of adventurers she would not rely on and would pass for better bringers of her will and might.

^This^

Seems that some players will start to whine the very second they are confronted with the existence of someone who is higher up on the food chain than their precious precious characters.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
LordOfThreshold wrote:
As mortals within the divine realm, maybe the sonic damage is just a side effect.

It isn't a side effect. She does it absolutely on purpose if she doesn't like the answers she gets, and she does it by telling her divine choir to hurt you (before she tells you that she wants you to run off on a glorified sidequest because her Herald managed to get himself midway between FUBAR and SNAFU). Any paladin who does what she does should fall so hard that they hit with enough force to end the dinosaurs.

Silver Crusade

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Midnight_Angel wrote:
LordOfThreshold wrote:
Honestly, I think this whole debate comes from New School players unable to play through an Old School scenario. People who are whining about a Goddess not treating them the way they think they should be treated are just the entitled types of adventurers she would not rely on and would pass for better bringers of her will and might.

^This^

Seems that some players will start to whine the very second they are confronted with the existence of someone who is higher up on the food chain than their precious precious characters.

I don't think that is the case (most of the time), most GMs and some players are unhappy about the kind of questions and answers she expects.

Getting punished for not answering exactly like the adventure wants, result in damage. Let's just say, there is room for improvement.


12 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
LordOfThreshold wrote:
Honestly, I think this whole debate comes from New School players unable to play through an Old School scenario. People who are whining about a Goddess not treating them the way they think they should be treated are just the entitled types of adventurers she would not rely on and would pass for better bringers of her will and might.

Ah, yes, insulting the other side of the argument as whiny and entitled, always a winner in internet discussions.

Maybe we just have a better sense of justice and honor as you "old school" guys, eh?

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Just realised something else that has been bothering me about the entire situation. As written this is actually not the groups first encounter with Iomedae it's actually the second. the first happening way back in the first book

Spoiler:
Devotion Point Awards

Iomedae takes note of the PCs as they work their way through
the Gray Garrison. Ancient laws and edicts beyond mortal
comprehension prevent her, or any of the deities, from taking
a direct hand in mortal affairs, even when those affairs are
being threatened by a demigod like Deskari, but neither will
the Inheritor sit idly by without providing a small boon to
those PCs who took time out to honor her fallen garrison.
After the wardstone is destroyed, the next time the PCs
rest, they have a singular, shared dream in which a scarred
but beautiful woman dressed in plate armor visits them
and thanks them for their kindness and service before
apologizing for the fact that she cannot help them in the
future. Yet she can grant them a token of her gratitude, and
kisses each dreaming PC on the brow.
When the PCs waken, their Devotion Points are gone—
in their place they gain additional rewards, depending
on how many points they accumulated overall. Note that
these rewards are cumulative; earning 10 or more points
grants all four of the following permanent boons.
1–4 Devotion Points: Each PC gains a permanent +2
bonus to a skill of her choice.
5–7 Devotion Points: Each PC gains 5 permanent hit points.
8–9 Devotion Points: Each PC gains a bonus feat of
his choice (the PC must qualify as normal for the feat’s
prerequisites).
10 or more Devotion Points: Each PC gains a +2 increase
to an ability score of her choice.

Frankly to me the way Iomedae acts in this scenario is completly diffrent than how she acts in book 5. Here she is humble, apolagetic and gives you abilities (Depending how well you do up to the equivilant of gaining a lvl) without the pop quiz or horn torture.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
LordOfThreshold wrote:

>Kidnapping

Has anyone actually considered that if a PC isn't interested in playing along with Iomedae, they could simply say, 'thanks, but no thanks' and ask to be returned to the Material Plane? There's nothing that says she isn't willing to let one of them pass if they don't think they are up for it. I doubt she would send anyone who wasn't willing to even sit through her interview. Nothing says you can't opt out.
Also, it mentions she brings them to Heaven when the players start to get restless or look for other things to do, so it's not like they weren't already interested in the next step of the war. That's a big giant clue on what they're to do next.

>Torture
As mortals within the divine realm, maybe the sonic damage is just a side effect. Mortals were not meant to hear the glorious sounds of the Gods orchestra. Ever seen that scene in 'Dogma'? It's like that.

And if you think 20D6 Sonic is bad, maybe you don't have what it takes to face the raw forces of the Abyss.

Honestly, if you have a group of PCs that mouth off to a goddess or attack her, they deserve exactly what happens to them. I'm from an old school group and all of them agree, you sit down and you shut up when a God talks. Any PC not showing proper deference, followed by an expectation of courageous or self assured actions, is gonna get it.

Any group not willing to show proper respect to a Goddess has a serious case of their own prideful self worth, a weakness the Abyss will quickly use to destroy them. Consider the PCs got their Mythic from the Wardstones which were placed by Iomedae. They owe her all of their strength and their actions should reflect it.

As for the penalty for the questions, maybe if they don't answer to Iomedae's expectations, the trumpets are a more visceral test? If they can survive the wrath of heaven's chorus, perhaps they have what it takes to suffer through the torments of the Abyss?

Honestly, I think this whole debate comes from New School players unable to play through an Old School scenario....

Actually I don't have a problem with someone higher up on the foodchain with me as I design my characters to a concept I honestly expect even those on my "level" to be better fighters as they always seem to choose based on power, or at least a better idea of what synthasuzes well.

What I have a problem with is the goddess of HONOUR AND JUSTICE slamming the party with several d6 of sonic damage just because they answered her question without hesitation when ...

1) Some religions (whose priest/ess may be amongst the group she grabbed) core tenant is what she's asking about and,
2) Said part has just spent 4 books and however long in actual game time thinking about these issues, what they mean and what their stance on it is.

Especially since if someone does hesitate or seem uncertain and two opposing groups start trying to convince them (something as the many, many, many alignment threads show wont be settled quickly or easily) that also fails and gets them hurt.

Having her cripple and cast down someone for their behaviour seems excessive considering her portfolio but again its the idea that a goddesses of justice hammers someone do badly rather than just sending them back is where my issue lies rather than her actually having the ability to do that if needed.

It's reminds me of the goddess of mercy in one story I didn't like who when an evil, manipulative elder tricks a noble warrior and some of his villagers into entering her temple without knowing what it is curses the warrior and seperates the warrior from his love because he killed someone who threatened nearly every one he knew and would do it again but rewards the villagers because they hadn't. I'm sorry but a goddess of MERCY should exemplify that and show mercy to the warrior while punishing the elder who set the whole thing up to gain rewards for his grandchildren AMD punish someone who stood up to him (if that).

It's the same here none of us deny Iomadae could slaughter the entire party in their sleep what concerns us is that her behaviour as a goddess of honour and justice, as the example for paladins is something most GMs would have a paladin fall for.

Seriously its bring this group in front of you, ask them questions, punish those who don't show sufficient respect or don't answer your questions correctly (even if they do answer in accordance to the religion and god they may be a PRIEST of) and then shrug it off as okay because if they don't have enough power/resources to heal themselves she does it for them. It says several times she pauses to allow the party to heal up don't you think even the most reasonable group might start getting suspicious if after answering Iomadae too quickly they get hurt as punishment and then she pauses to let her cleric (the most likely source of healing) heal them by praying to her as opposed to either denying them healing or doing it directly?

Then there's also the slightly worrying precedent of her grabbing the party in the first place. Sure she has the power but there has to be a reason this doesn't happen more often otherwise what's to stop Deskari summoning one party member at a time till they fail a saving throw and setting an army of mythic beings on them? Kill off his biggest threats one at a time.

And as was just pointed out she probably HAS been aware of them since book one where she already gave them rewards. If she really had to "punish" them doesn't it make more sense if instead of xd6 sonic damage she just takes away their devotion rewards. I mean you can wind up blind, mute, crippled and back on the prime material while still benefiting from the devotion rewards Iomadae gave you a year or so ago and if THAT doesn't start ringing alarm bells about what your facing I don't know what will.


7 people marked this as a favorite.
LordOfThreshold wrote:

>Kidnapping

Has anyone actually considered that if a PC isn't interested in playing along with Iomedae, they could simply say, 'thanks, but no thanks' and ask to be returned to the Material Plane? There's nothing that says she isn't willing to let one of them pass if they don't think they are up for it. I doubt she would send anyone who wasn't willing to even sit through her interview. Nothing says you can't opt out.
Also, it mentions she brings them to Heaven when the players start to get restless or look for other things to do, so it's not like they weren't already interested in the next step of the war. That's a big giant clue on what they're to do next.

You're lying in bed when jackbooted thugs bust into your home, throw you into the back of a windowless van and then drive you somewhere. When the van stops, you politely ask them to return you to their home. So they drive all the way back and let you leave. Would you say that this wouldn't be a case a kidnapping?

LordOfThreshold wrote:

Honestly, if you have a group of PCs that mouth off to a goddess DMPC or attack her, they deserve exactly what happens to them. I'm from an old school group and all of them agree, you sit down and you shut up when a God DMPC talks. Any PC not showing proper deference, followed by an expectation of courageous or self assured actions, is gonna get it.

Any group not willing to show proper respect to a Goddess DMPC has a serious case of their own prideful self worth, a weakness the Abyss will quickly use to destroy them. Consider the PCs got their Mythic from the Wardstones which were placed by Iomedae said DMPC. They owe her all of their strength and their actions should reflect it.

"There is one and only one right way for players to roleplay their characters in this encounter."

In general, removing any control or agency from the players and forcing them into a narrow spectrum of possibilities is bad GMing. Saying that your players should be roleplaying their characters in a specific way is bad GMing. This sort of railroading doesn't become okay if the GM deploys a deity to try to enforce it. It doesn't become good GMing because it is written in the AP.

Also consider that by this point in the campaign, the PCs can be nearly god-like in their powers. Hell, it's possible they can even grant spells to followers. In some respects they are more powerful than deities: they don't have the non-intervention pact. This is why Iomedae needs to ask the PCs for aid in the first place. A common defense of this scenario as written is that Iomedae is allowed be petty and cruel and demand respect because she's a god and hence deserves respect. The same reasoning lets the PCs demand respect because they are near-gods. Either the power of a god means you deserve this respect, or it doesn't. You can't have it both ways.

Shadow Lodge

7 people marked this as a favorite.
Midnight_Angel wrote:
LordOfThreshold wrote:
Honestly, I think this whole debate comes from New School players unable to play through an Old School scenario. People who are whining about a Goddess not treating them the way they think they should be treated are just the entitled types of adventurers she would not rely on and would pass for better bringers of her will and might.

^This^

Seems that some players will start to whine the very second they are confronted with the existence of someone who is higher up on the food chain than their precious precious characters.

Or you two could actually READ the discussion, and learn that it's not "players whining about not being treated the way they want to be or not being the highest thing on the food chain" and it IS "GMs complaining about the deity being portrayed acting and behaving in a way that is contrary with everything we know about their personality, dogma, and alignment".

The Exchange

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Orthos wrote:
Midnight_Angel wrote:
LordOfThreshold wrote:
Honestly, I think this whole debate comes from New School players unable to play through an Old School scenario. People who are whining about a Goddess not treating them the way they think they should be treated are just the entitled types of adventurers she would not rely on and would pass for better bringers of her will and might.

^This^

Seems that some players will start to whine the very second they are confronted with the existence of someone who is higher up on the food chain than their precious precious characters.

Or you two could actually READ the discussion, and learn that it's not "players whining about not being treated the way they want to be or not being the highest thing on the food chain" and it IS "GMs complaining about the deity being portrayed acting and behaving in a way that is contrary with everything we know about their personality, dogma, and alignment".

Yep, exactly this. "This whole debate" started on a GM reference thread, by GMs, and moved here when it became too large. It was also agreed early on that most of the problem is not that the PCs have a serious chance at failing, but that it's possible to "fail" a conversation with Iomedae in the first place, and when you do, she literally tortures you, even as she demands that you risk your life and eternal soul for her. Which is not something a goddess of good and justice is supposed to do.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
LordOfThreshold wrote:
And if you think 20D6 Sonic is bad, maybe you don't have what it takes to face the raw forces of the Abyss.

20d6 sonic damage isn't bad for these PCs to be encountering. 20d6 sonic damage inflicted by a supposed ally and patron because you didn't answer a question she really has no good reason according to the exact,self-contradictory criteria she has in mind, on the other hand, is petty, vindictive, absurd, and unworthy of anyone with a Good alignment, let alone the Goddess of Honor and Justice.


To butcher a phrase coined by Nixon, 'It isn't Evil when a Goddess does it.'
As a DM and Player, I think Iomedae was well within her rights to do what she did. The presentation of her actions may not be to people's liking, but as morality and alignments are things that vary from campaign to campaign and person to person, any action taken by the ultimate personification of an ideal is up to interpretation. While a Paladin may not be able to do what she did, she is no Paladin. She is above that, beyond it, a personification of those ideals. If she judges an action necessary, we as mortals are not ones to quibble and argue with her. The players may be strong, but they are nothing compared to her. This is her separating the wheat from the chaff and woe to the player who thinks they are too good for her tests. If you think her actions don't fit into your game, change them, but clearly she was written as intended. We may not like it, bu as the designers of the world dictate the state of that world, they also dictate it's morality. If a game designer presented slavery as a cruel but Lawful status, we won't like that, but that is the way things are in his world.

Iomedae didn't call on the celestial choir maliciously or with the intention of attacking the PCs. She gives them time to heal between tests and erases the effects of the damage at the end. If you read a strict interpretation of what the books says, the players may have to answer in a specific way, but any group who takes their time to consider their words carefully or explain themselves, who give her an satisfactory answer, would pass. Slapping them around because they didn't give the exact solution the book presents is a flaw in our interpretation. As a DM running the adventure, we have more flexibility than that. If a trap has a specific means of disabling it but a clever players finds another way, all good DMs would reward them. This scenario applies to RPing encounters just as much.

These are extraordinary circumstances. Summoning mortals to a godly realm is just not done, but the Fifth Crusade, which is one of Iomedae's primary concerns on Golarion and a major conflict between LG vs. CE, is on the edge of a knife. The loss of the herald is a huge setback and the crusade could fail if it isn't fixed. With so much riding on her area of interests, Iomedae has to take action quickly, which means she doesn't have the time or luxury of contacting the PCs through messengers. She needs to send them now and needs to be sure they have what it takes. The difference between this and Deskari summong the PCs to kill them is presumably the PCs are servants of Iomedae and willing to do her will. A deity may not be able to summon an enemy in this way, but a divine patron could do the same to a possible champion and offer them the chance to serve a great task.

And as for the jackbooted thugs idea, remove any harm done to you in the transit and when they remove the black bag from your head, you're sitting in the Oval Office with Obama sitting at his desk with a very serious look.

He says, "I have a problem I think you are perfect to help me solve."

You would be stumbling over yourself with so many 'Yes, sirs' and 'No, Sirs,' you wouldn't have time to object. You'd be honored, humbled by the fact this this great person has called on you to help them in their time of need. So he has some tests, some of them painful, for you to undertake. You're about the change history for the most powerful person in the world. Show some respect.

The Exchange

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber

Here is my modified version of how I'll run this, should I ever get the chance.

Please note that this is a rough outline, and thanks to all of you who suggested the many great points on this thread that I incorporated into this.

Wall of Text:

• Summoned to meeting by helm angel
• Iomedae has brought them to her Cathedral
• Angelic and Petitioner choir singing
• Stained glass windows that shift to show glorious deeds committed by Iomedae in life, as well as those done by followers in her name. Some of these depict deeds that the PC's have done throughout the course of the AP. Describe how some of the scenes seem to shift in wherever they look, accounting scenes that get Iomedea's original points across (knowledge and respect for what came before, understanding when and how to redeem, and bravery in the face of overwhelming odds). The choir sings of these deeds in Celestial.
• After a while, the windows all change to depict a scene of a battle, and the summoning if her herald, and his subsequent defeat and capture.
• A growing presence begins to manifest in the room
• Light becomes brighter, to the point where each candle seems like a sun unto itself, and the very fabric of reality seems to vibrate around them. (DC 40 Will save or be blinded and deafened).
• Presence coalesces into Iomedae's mortal form.
• She frowns slightly at the afflicted PC's, and with a wave of her hand, they are restored.
• She tells them that she has brought them here, so that she can prepare them for the task of rescuing her herald, or putting him to rest if he is to far corrupted. She can feel the pressure of Baphomet's corruption on her power imbued in the herald.
• At this point, the choir's song changes suddenly into a powerful war-song, and Ragathiel flies into the Cathedral.
• He questions as the PC's as to whether or not they are truly ready to face down a demon lord in his own demesne. Whether they are strong enough to not break if captured, or if sending them would be sending the Crusade's strongest members to fight for the enemy.
• He gives the party a chance to present their case, and then challenges them to a duel, wanting to see their strength as a group in such a situation.
• He does not kill anyone, and if anyone falls they are immediately stabilized. Once he gets to 200 hit points, Iomedae raises her hand, and they all find themselves (Ragathiel included) fully healed and repaired, weapons sheathed, standing before her again.

(Assuming they completed Ragathiel's trial) she nods to Ragathiel, and turns to the party; "They will do their best, Ragathiel, and that has been enough up to now. All the same, a little help could not hurt their odds." And she then gifts them with the holy symbols, Stole of the Inheritor, and etc. Ragathiel also gives a 1-use Smite ability to each PC.

(Working on stats for Ragathiel, but they may be a while)


8 people marked this as a favorite.

I don't buy it Thresh. And I've had plenty of old school gamers balk at the idea of their patron and supposed ally slap them around after asking them for help. I don't mind the whisking away to Heaven. That's fine and the allegations of "kidnapping" are really just a symptom of her later sound blasting her supposed allies. After the first sound blast, I'd honestly be stumbling over myself more with "F+%+ off" and "Get bent", mixed in with some complimentary spitting in the face. But then again, it's easier to, y'know, ask for help. You know, ask these heroes who have sacrificed so much for the cause when no one else could do the job in the last four books. These heroes that have saved Kenebres and took back Drezen and even went into enemy territory to root out the secret of what is making these demons mythic. I'm pretty sure most players would have said "Sure, let's do it" right from the get go. But naw, that's the easy route. Gotta put those new age players in their place, right? Show them that GM is king and we are not worthy of their game? ;)

Seriously, majority of the people I know would just tell Iomedae to find another patzy and take them back home. Congrats, adventure is done. Move on to the sixth book. If I wanted to get caned bloody by an angry woman that gets off on that, I'd go back to Catholic school.

EDIT: And you know what, if she had stated at the beginning that she wanted to put the PCs through perilous tests to prepare them for the delve into Baphomet's domain, I actually would have been okay with that. At least, as a player, I could accept and understand that and roll with it. But as it stands, I wouldn't saved this herald even if she threatened the life of my closest friends. If she is so strong and mysterious and above us, she can get off her lazy fauld and get him her own damned self.

Shadow Lodge

8 people marked this as a favorite.

Did someone just seriously quote Nixon as support for their argument?


Odraude wrote:
I don't buy it Thresh. And I've had plenty of old school gamers balk at the idea of their patron and supposed ally slap them around after asking them for help. I don't mind the whisking away to Heaven. That's fine and the allegations of "kidnapping" are really just a symptom of her later sound blasting her supposed allies. After the first sound blast, I'd honestly be stumbling over myself more with "F%~* off" and "Get bent", mixed in with some complimentary spitting in the face. But then again, it's easier to, y'know, ask for help. You know, ask these heroes who have sacrificed so much for the cause when no one else could do the job in the last four books. These heroes that have saved Kenebres and took back Drezen and even went into enemy territory to root out the secret of what is making these demons mythic. I'm pretty sure most players would have said "Sure, let's do it" right from the get go. But naw, that's the easy route. Gotta put those new age players in their place, right? Show them that GM is king and we are not worthy of their game? ;)

I'm both a player and a DM, but that doesn't change my opinion on this matter, I would expect this scenario no matter what side of the screen I was on. This is a meeting of a goddess' will and that of a group of mortals. No matter what they have done, or what they are capable of, they aren't capable of anything like she is. The players might as well start screaming WE ARE NOT WORTHY when this encounter starts, except that only puts Iomedae off and she doubts their tenacity. If you think this section of the campaign is meant to give the DM free reign to slap PCs around, you've entirely missed the point of the adventure path and this adventure specifically. The players have been chosen for this honor, the best among equals, you don't get a medal in the military and then shove it back in the face of the people who gave it to you and your fellow soldiers, screaming that you are the best there ever was. You accept it with dignity. Again as I said before, the players got their power from the Wardstone, placed by Iomedae herself. They owe her their great power.

Odraude wrote:
Seriously, majority of the people I know would just tell Iomedae to find another patzy and take them back home. Congrats, adventure is done. Move on to the sixth book. If I wanted to get caned bloody by an angry woman that gets off on that, I'd go back to Catholic school.

Considering that type of attitude, Iomedae would probably pass on any character who had that opinion as not up to the task or worthy of her trust.

Odraude wrote:
EDIT: And you know what, if she had stated at the beginning that she wanted to put the PCs through perilous tests to prepare them for the delve into Baphomet's domain, I actually would have been okay with that. At least, as a player, I could accept and understand that and roll with it. But as it stands, I wouldn't saved this herald even if she threatened the life of my closest friends. If she is so strong and mysterious and above us, she can get off her lazy fauld and get him her own damned self.

If that is the case, we might as well not even play an adventure path at all. Surely someone else will save the world while the heroes sit at home basking in their indignation? I'm sure that will be a comfort while the Fifth Crusade crumbles around them because they weren't willing to put their pride aside for a moment.

My only modification to the scenario would be to have Iomedae present them as tests right off the bat and demand any who are not willing to submit to her judgement to speak up and be counted among those unwilling to put their lives on the line. Whether that player would continue the adventure path would be up to him, but later in the book it mentions that anyone calling on Nocticula for aid would lose some Mythic power, so that could be a suitable consequence, but I think that would be an overtaxing trade off to the party at large.

Still, if the PCs do not like the way Iomedae talked to them or how she decides to test them, once they leave Heaven, no one is forcing them to undertake the quest she presented.

The challenges go out of their way to be open ended. The first is solved by player knowledge which I hope anyone who reads anything about Iomedae or Golarion could answer and if not a relatively easy skill check, followed by a chance for the players to brag about their own accomplishments, giving them the opportunity to boast about their deeds and who doesn't like that?

The second and third state they have no clear answer, only that at least one player give some thought to their answer. Anyone who answers such a monumental philosophical question with a knee jerk hasn't put much thought into their answer.

This is a role-playing challenge, which is why it's so contentious for people with differing styles of playing their game. I read the interview with a chuckle trying to imagine any player I know who would actually fail at such open ended challenge. This whole thing is practically a guaranteed victory if you're a little smart and have a sense of some self-preservation.

TOZ wrote:
Did someone just seriously quote Nixon as support for their argument?

Yes, yes I did.

Dark Archive

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Seriously as I pointed out above she dosent remain consistent with her own personality between her appearence in book 1 and her appearence in book 5 (Which now that I think about it is even weirder since a huge deal is made of her 'first' appearence in book 5 when she has already appeared with very little fanfair in book 1)


4 people marked this as a favorite.
LordOfThreshold wrote:


I'm both a player and a DM, but that doesn't change my opinion on this matter, I would expect this scenario no matter what side of the screen I was on. This is a meeting of a goddess' will and that of a group of mortals. No matter what they have done, or what they are capable of, they aren't capable of anything like she is. The players might as well start screaming WE ARE NOT WORTHY when this encounter starts, except that only puts Iomedae off and she doubts their tenacity. If you think this section of the campaign is meant to give the DM free reign to slap PCs around, you've entirely missed the point of the adventure path and this adventure specifically. The players have been chosen for this honor, the best among equals, you don't get a medal in the military and then shove it back in the face of the people who gave it to you and your fellow soldiers, screaming that you are the best there ever was. You accept it with dignity. Again as I said before, the players got their power from the Wardstone, placed by Iomedae herself. They owe her their great power.

That metaphor makes no sense. When you receive a medal in the military, you usually don't have to answer inane questions and get your ass beat by the guy giving you the medal. You've already earned the medal, with blood, sweat, tears, and the lives of your comrades. Having to answer questions with the threat of Justin Beiber turned up to 11 to earn your medal makes zero sense.

Like in real-life, if she wants to command respect, she had better act it. Acting petty and pushing the players around because they don't answer the way she likes isn't commanding respect, goddess or not. It's her coming to the players for help, not the other way around. She is the one whose herald has been taken by Baphomet and she needs help. Smacking around the PCs to prove a point is a pretty terrible way to secure their help. But again, she is a paladin and now canonically the epitome of Lawful Stupid. I'd actually upgrade it to Lawful Moronic. At least paladins are disruptive during the adventure, not before it.

And yeah, if she had stated that these tests were going to happen before raking them along the coals, I'd be a lot more okay with it. At least there's some player agency there and the characters can at the end go "Well, she did warn us it'd be rough." But there is no choice. There is no agency. It's just a cutscene where the pitiful little players are in the hands of an angry god and get smacked around if they don't answer the way she wants. Not just correctly, but the way she wants. After the first WHOMP of her Inception buzz, I think many players would flat-out refuse her offer and continue actually saving the world. Rather than helping some petulant child goddess save her errand boy.

Honestly, there have been so many better ideas in this and the other thread that replace the current drivel. I think PCs are better off using Iomedae as a relatable figure that's "been in the s%%!", not Sister Jude from American Horror Story. Having her as a fellow crusader would not only help relate the god as a person (being one of a few mortals that achieved godhood) and inspire the awe that the book failed so hard at. But as it stands, the players have to deal with a female Jonathan Edwards putting the naughty players into their place preparing the players for their second trip to the Abyss.

Honestly this is worse than the first book of Skull and Shackles. At least there, you are supposed to hate Mr. Plugg!


17 people marked this as a favorite.

Sheesh, I take one day off from following the thread and look what happens.

All right, let's hit some of the talking points...

* First off, I've been playing AD&D since the Player's Handbook had a large orange demon on the cover. I was going to GenCon when it was still at the Parkside campus in Kenosha. I've been to the Barrier Peaks, the Tomb of Horrors, and Hommlet. I am, in short, as old school as it effing gets without actually having been in Gary's original campaign or playing Chainmail. I say this not to brag, but to explode someone's theory that all the people complaining about the Iomedae encounter are 'entitled new age players' or whatever namecalling you were using to cover your total lack of argument. Because I have been alive for over 40 years, and have been throwing dice on tabletops for around 30 of them, and I think that encounter was written horribly.

* 20d6 sonic is not 'negligible' damage. Sure, 15th-level/7th tier mythic characters can survive it... but characters of that power level could survive doing the backstroke in an erupting volcano, so, that's hardly proof of anything. In fact, in the old Spelljammer rules they actually statted out the falling damage for literally being dropped from orbit... and it was 20d6 damage. So, basically, Iomedae thinks failure to answer her question is punishable by as much pain as trying to undergo atmospheric re-entry in your birthday suit. That is insane.

* There is an alignment already written in the rules for people who believe that having superior power or position allows you to freely ignore rules that are for lesser people, and that there's nothing wrong with inflicting pain and injury on people just because you feel like it. The problem is, that alignment is the one they call Chaotic Evil. Iomedae is supposed to be the other alignment. Y'know, the one that believes that even the most important person has to live by the same rules as the least important person (Lawful) and that you're not supposed to hurt people just because you're not getting exactly what you want (Good).

* re: 'unwilling to put their lives on the line' -- one of the many problems with the tests is that the tests are b##~~#$~. They aren't useful methods to actually test for what Iomedae is supposed to be looking for.

In an earlier post I showed that Captain America would probably score a zero out of three on this test, which means its useless as a test for finding out who's got the right stuff or not. In this post, I shall tackle the test from the other example... by finding the worst possible person who could actually pass it. But rather than use subjective examples, I'll actually stick to one with a Pathfinder writeup.

Question #1 -- its mechanically listed as a DC 25 Knowledge (Religion) check. Anybody who can make that check makes the question. So, this is an actual stat we can look up! And do you know who can pass that check in their sleep? Nocticula. She's only got a Knowledge (Religion) of +51 listed in her writeup. She could throw a natural 1 and still pass the DC for the check by more than 2x over. Actually, Nocticula would score a 2 out of 3 on this exam.

Question #2 -- the pass/fail condition for this test is admitting that you're not sure, or being hesitant to come to a conclusion. This one she almost certainly fails; demon lords seldom feel uncertainty, and even when they do they don't admit it. It's a sign of weakness, and they hate showing those.

Question #3 -- But by the same token, that lovely demon lord overconfidence/pride thing means that Nocticula will sail through this one. The success condition for this one is being certain about your answer, about being confident that you can get the mission done... and, well, demon lords are generally prideful and confident and sorts.

So, Iomedae's "hero test" is so idiotically written that your average demon lord would score a minimum 2 out of 3 on this thing. What kind of hero test is that?

No, I'm sorry, this isn't 'entitled player whining'. This is 'experienced GM looks at this encounter and notes that the writing not only is massively OOC and against alignment and class restrictions for Iomedae, it doesn't make any logical sense to begin with and wouldn't even if running this kind of test was IC behavior for the deity in question'.

The scene simply does not logically jibe with its own alleged goals. If Iomedae is testing for 'you must be this heroic to go on the Abyss ride', then shouldn't the tests actually involve searching for heroic qualities? Everything listed on this test is ethically neutral. Knowledge, lack of self-confidence, abundance of self-confidence; these are all traits that both heroes and villains can have.

Iomedae's 'hero test' is nothing of the kind, and would still be a badly written scene even if it was 100% voluntary and the worst consequence of getting a question wrong was being slapped on the wrist with a piece of overcooked spaghetti. That the test comes across as an unholy hybrid of being given extraordinary rendition to Camp X-Ray and competing in gorram Genkibowl, and the prize for guessing wrong involves being slapped with enough damage to kill an average frost giant in only two hits, only makes it exponentially worse.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

To be fair, she is the goddess of paladins. I shouldn't be surprised that the Queen of Paladins is everything that is Lawful Stupid.

This was such a missed opportunity. This really could have been a cool encounter, but instead it reeks of a GM putting the players back into their place to show those little upstarts what's what and stroke their ego. This is stuff that 14 year old DMs would do. I'd like to think we are better than that.

My mind can't make sense of this screw up!


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Chuckg wrote:

Sheesh, I take one day off from following the thread and look what happens.

All right, let's hit some of the talking points...

* First off, I've been playing AD&D since the Player's Handbook had a large orange demon on the cover. I was going to GenCon when it was still at the Parkside campus in Kenosha. I've been to the Barrier Peaks, the Tomb of Horrors, and Hommlet. I am, in short, as old school as it effing gets without actually having been in Gary's original campaign or playing Chainmail. I say this not to brag, but to explode someone's theory that all the people complaining about the Iomedae encounter are 'entitled new age players' or whatever namecalling you were using to cover your total lack of argument. Because I have been alive for over 40 years, and have been throwing dice on tabletops for around 30 of them, and I think that encounter was written horribly.

* 20d6 sonic is not 'negligible' damage. Sure, 15th-level/7th tier mythic characters can survive it... but characters of that power level could survive doing the backstroke in an erupting volcano, so, that's hardly proof of anything. In fact, in the old Spelljammer rules they actually statted out the falling damage for literally being dropped from orbit... and it was 20d6 damage. So, basically, Iomedae thinks failure to answer her question is punishable by as much pain as trying to undergo atmospheric re-entry in your birthday suit. That is insane.

* There is an alignment already written in the rules for people who believe that having superior power or position allows you to freely ignore rules that are for lesser people, and that there's nothing wrong with inflicting pain and injury on people just because you feel like it. The problem is, that alignment is the one they call Chaotic Evil. Iomedae is supposed to be the other alignment. Y'know, the one that believes that even the most important person has to live by the same rules as the least important person (Lawful) and that you're not supposed to hurt people just...

But but... the players are always entitled and whiny! If they aren't awing my NPCs, then clearly they deserve what comes to them ;)

Snarky joking aside, this and Kevin Mack's observation show just how silly this entire encounter is. I feel like I should have the following quote printed on the front doors of Iomadae's keep in Heaven:

"There is nothing that keeps Players at any one moment out of hell, but the mere pleasure of the GM."


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Odraude wrote:
To be fair, she is the goddess of paladins. I shouldn't be surprised that the Queen of Paladins is everything that is Lawful Stupid.

In addition to everything said on that topic earlier, its not even a good example of Lawful Stupid.

If a paladin of Iomedae had tried this same kind of s$$# on anyone else, they'd be losing their paladin powers so fast that you couldn't time it with an atomic stopwatch. So if Iomedae is ignoring the same kind of behavior rules that she makes all of her employees live under because she's the boss and so rules are for other people, that means this is an example of Chaotic Stupid.

This encounter fails so hard it fails at failing.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Chuckg wrote:
Odraude wrote:
To be fair, she is the goddess of paladins. I shouldn't be surprised that the Queen of Paladins is everything that is Lawful Stupid.

In addition to everything said on that topic earlier, its not even a good example of Lawful Stupid.

If a paladin of Iomedae had tried this same kind of s%$& on anyone else, they'd be losing their paladin powers so fast that you couldn't time it with an atomic stopwatch. So if Iomedae is ignoring the same kind of behavior rules that she makes all of her employees live under because she's the boss and so rules are for other people, that means this is an example of Chaotic Stupid.

This encounter fails so hard it fails at failing.

Hey don't ruin this for me! I now have carte blanch to be a paladin and do pvp!! ;)

I think I can sum this up easily. Imagine if you took the elves from Second Darkness and Erastil's misogyny, mixed them together, and made this encounter. You have the irritating NPC from the former and the "Good God acting Evil" aspect of the second one.

It's like an evil Reese's Peanut Butter cup.


6 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
LordOfThreshold wrote:
To butcher a phrase coined by Nixon, 'It isn't Evil when a Goddess does it.'

A sentiment that is neither Lawful, Good, Just, nor Honorable.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
LordOfThreshold wrote:

>Kidnapping

Has anyone actually considered that if a PC isn't interested in playing along with Iomedae, they could simply say, 'thanks, but no thanks' and ask to be returned to the Material Plane? There's nothing that says she isn't willing to let one of them pass if they don't think they are up for it. I doubt she would send anyone who wasn't willing to even sit through her interview. Nothing says you can't opt out.
Also, it mentions she brings them to Heaven when the players start to get restless or look for other things to do, so it's not like they weren't already interested in the next step of the war. That's a big giant clue on what they're to do next.

>Torture
As mortals within the divine realm, maybe the sonic damage is just a side effect. Mortals were not meant to hear the glorious sounds of the Gods orchestra. Ever seen that scene in 'Dogma'? It's like that.

And if you think 20D6 Sonic is bad, maybe you don't have what it takes to face the raw forces of the Abyss.

Honestly, if you have a group of PCs that mouth off to a goddess or attack her, they deserve exactly what happens to them. I'm from an old school group and all of them agree, you sit down and you shut up when a God talks. Any PC not showing proper deference, followed by an expectation of courageous or self assured actions, is gonna get it.

Any group not willing to show proper respect to a Goddess has a serious case of their own prideful self worth, a weakness the Abyss will quickly use to destroy them. Consider the PCs got their Mythic from the Wardstones which were placed by Iomedae. They owe her all of their strength and their actions should reflect it.

As for the penalty for the questions, maybe if they don't answer to Iomedae's expectations, the trumpets are a more visceral test? If they can survive the wrath of heaven's chorus, perhaps they have what it takes to suffer through the torments of the Abyss?

Honestly, I think this whole debate comes from New School players unable to play through an Old School scenario....

I personally think this is the case. Maybe it's just from my tendency to play religious characters anyway, but my main thought along this line is, so long as the PCs behave in a somewhat sane manner, they'll get through the issue just fine. There's a reason gods in Paizo don't have stats. They're so powerful they can kill with just a stare, and the average person from Golarion, even if they were from Rahadoum, would at least mind their manners while in such a being's presence. Frankly, if you're playing the kind of person to talk back to or even try to hit on a goddess (a friend I play with SERIOUSLY said he would attempt to flirt with Iomedae if the opportunity arose), then why are you even playing Wrath of the Righteous to begin with?


8 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

How is trying to hit on a goddess a thing which disqualifies you from wanting to play a good character? Cayden Cailean would be totally down with this attitude. So would probably be Shelyn.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
magnuskn wrote:
How is trying to hit on a goddess a thing which disqualifies you from wanting to play a good character? Cayden Cailean would be totally down with this attitude. So would probably be Shelyn.

Or Calistria, and she almost certainly has CG followers.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

And you know as I keep saying the failure condition for the second question is answering yes/no straight off but this ISN'T a knee jerk response its something the players have been made to think about for the last FOUR books. If they don't have an opinion by now somethings wrong.

Being the personification of something doesn't mean you can ignore it means you DO it and only it. If the goddess of honour and justice acts like this then this Ida honourable, just and something everyone holding to those ideals can do as well OR she's WRONG. It's the equivilent of seeing superman or captain America brutally murdering a jwalker and saying hey if he does it it can't be wrong as opposed to oh god he's gone too far.

To return to my earlier point where is the sense in healing up between questions by having a cleric of Iomadae pray to her to heal the damage she did?

Finally my character doesn't worship or serve her really, she'll try and rescue the herald because it is a request from a goddess but its not one she'd worship even if she was particularly religious because Iomadae isn't really something she's comfortable with as she's not a hero just a poor little Hengeyoki who went to find out what happened to her teacher and somehow found herself caught in a position where she stands against an army of demons at the gates to the abyss or sees her whole world potentially fall.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

Also, the encounter is anything but a simple 'as long as you don't attack her or mouth off to her, you'll be fine'. The questions are so poorly chosen and presented that even with the best intentions in the world, its still quite likely that you're gonna get failsmacked at least once.

That questions #2 and #3 have failure conditions that are the exact opposite of each other makes it even worse. Who the hell is likely to answer question #2 without hesitation, get slammed by Iomedae for not showing hesitation... and then jump right into question #3 with the same degree of confidence that they did question #2? It's a pretty normal human response that if you get zapped for doing something, your next attempt will try something else.


Alleran wrote:
magnuskn wrote:
How is trying to hit on a goddess a thing which disqualifies you from wanting to play a good character? Cayden Cailean would be totally down with this attitude. So would probably be Shelyn.
Or Calistria, and she almost certainly has CG followers.

Calistria would probably arch an eyebrow and then take you to a sideroom.

Then you take 20d6 physical damage. ;)

Cayden: She wasn't joking man! Why do you think I took the test of the Starstone?

Shadow Lodge

Odraude wrote:
To be fair, she is the goddess of paladins. I shouldn't be surprised that the Queen of Paladins is everything that is Lawful Stupid.

I'm just going to link the rant I already did on this wretched, flimsy, and pointless excuse for an excuse.

Shadow Lodge

Andrea1 wrote:
Cayden: She wasn't joking man! Why do you think I took the test of the Starstone?

Because you were blitzed out of your skull, as I recall.

Shadow Lodge

Quote:

And as for the jackbooted thugs idea, remove any harm done to you in the transit and when they remove the black bag from your head, you're sitting in the Oval Office with Obama sitting at his desk with a very serious look.

He says, "I have a problem I think you are perfect to help me solve."

You would be stumbling over yourself with so many 'Yes, sirs' and 'No, Sirs,' you wouldn't have time to object. You'd be honored, humbled by the fact this this great person has called on you to help them in their time of need. So he has some tests, some of them painful, for you to undertake. You're about the change history for the most powerful person in the world.

Hahahahhahahahahahahaah NO. I love it when people try to tell me how I'll react to a situation and not only get it wrong but so completely so.

Frankly my response would be "If that's how you treat your specialists, much less your citizens, you can take your problem and smoke it. I'm out." Or perhaps the slightly less snarky "You should have just called. I'm sure the NSA could have gotten you my number."

Quote:
Show some respect.

No. Respect is earned. And it's earned slowly and lost quickly.

Speaking of Obama, I already barely acknowledge the man, and I certainly don't respect him, or the vast majority of his contemporaries. He just happens to be the more convincing swindler. Right now at best I give him the benefit of the doubt, and there's days he doesn't even get that.

An action like that is a good way to get rid of the last little sliver of acknowledgement I have to spare him.

As for Iomedae, she's at the least (supposed to be) Lawful Good, and not a politician. Any respect I'd have for her would have been built on the actions of her church and followers, not anything intrinsically tied to her position or rank or level of power. While that would give her a few higher marks in my sight, and actual respect if I'd been significantly persuaded by her followers, that would likewise be fairly quickly eradicated - and the good done by her worshipers as either a sham or a group of heartily-duped fanatics - by the events of this encounter.


Orthos wrote:
Andrea1 wrote:
Cayden: She wasn't joking man! Why do you think I took the test of the Starstone?
Because you were blitzed out of your skull, as I recall.

Calistria:It is because no mortal can withstand my charms. So he got drunk and took the test so he could shag me.

Cayden:LIES!

The Exchange

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Quote:


And as for the jackbooted thugs idea, remove any harm done to you in the transit and when they remove the black bag from your head, you're sitting in the Oval Office with Obama sitting at his desk with a very serious look.

He says, "I have a problem I think you are perfect to help me solve."

You would be stumbling over yourself with so many 'Yes, sirs' and 'No, Sirs,' you wouldn't have time to object. You'd be honored, humbled by the fact this this great person has called on you to help them in their time of need. So he has some tests, some of them painful, for you to undertake. You're about the change history for the most powerful person in the world. Show some respect.

And the funny thing about this? I actually used the "kidnapped by Obama" comparison a couple pages back to describe just how problematic the situation is:

"Put in another way - if a couple of burly guys snatched you from your home and and brought you to the white house to have lunch with Barack Obama, where he will discuss appointing you as The King of Awesome in the US... you were still kidnapped. Moreover so if you later found out that had you misbehaved during lunch, a sniper would have shot non lethal plastic rounds at your head. Very painful, though of course you would have still lived through it. Oh, and if you disappointed Obama and got shot multiple times? he would still smile by the end of the conversation and say, "mah, you are the best I have anyway. You are still hired"."

So yeah, the Obama comparison doesn't work for you at all, I think.

Quote:


To butcher a phrase coined by Nixon, 'It isn't Evil when a Goddess does it.'

But that's exactly the thing. If Iomedae is a good goddess, it doesn't mean that she is incapable of doing a bad thing - some actions are objectively bad, moreover so in a Pathfinder world that operates by the laws of the alignment system. For example, Iomedae burning and orphanage for no reason would be an evil act. So how come she isn't evil? because she *doesn't* burn down an orphanage. Because she is ACTUALLY good.

Which is why her behavior in this module is so problematic. In your own terms, it could be thought of as a paradox - if Iomadae only does good thing, and everything that she does is good, why is she displaying evil behavior?

Quote:


And you know as I keep saying the failure condition for the second question is answering yes/no straight off but this ISN'T a knee jerk response its something the players have been made to think about for the last FOUR books. If they don't have an opinion by now somethings wrong.

To be fair, the entire point of the question in the adventure is that there is no clear cut answer - and so, according to that logic, your players should NOT be ready with a "yes" or "no" answer. It does, however, make sense for them to be ready with an instinctive "we are not entirely sure, and will relay on our head and heart to determine each case individually", which I think would mean, even in the encounter as written, that they pass the test.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
LordOfThreshold wrote:

And as for the jackbooted thugs idea, remove any harm done to you in the transit and when they remove the black bag from your head, you're sitting in the Oval Office with Obama sitting at his desk with a very serious look.

He says, "I have a problem I think you are perfect to help me solve."

You would be stumbling over yourself with so many 'Yes, sirs' and 'No, Sirs,' you wouldn't have time to object. You'd be honored, humbled by the fact this this great person has called on you to help them in their time of need. So he has some tests, some of them painful, for you to undertake. You're about the change history for the most powerful person in the world. Show some respect.

Christ, I missed this earlier.

As for 'you would be humbled to change history for the most powerful person in the world' thing you have going... yeah, speak for yourself. I wouldn't put up with this s!$# from the Presidents I actually voted for, much less one of the ones I voted against. If the man wants to haul in someone in the middle of the night and give him orders to go somewhere and do something dangerous... he has an entire Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marine Corps full of people who volunteered to do this. Who signed a contract giving him the right to do this -- to them. Likewise for civilian employees of executive branch agencies, such as the FBI, the CIA, etc, etc, etc. All of them are available for hazardous service because they chose to be.

Are you sensing a consistent theme here? Yup. The theme is 'choice'. The theme is 'consent'. Seriously, dude, are you even an American citizen? Do you have any idea how hideously illegal by the laws of our country this would be for even the President to do? You have to volunteer to put yourself under military discipline in this country... we don't even have a normal military draft anymore, let alone a full-on 'let's randomly shanghai someone from civilian life into anything the President feels like' scenario you're describing here.

So, seeing as how I was once in uniform getting myself injured and suchlike precisely to help preserve and defend the right of ordinary US citizens to be able to tell their government "I obey the law, I pay my taxes, and that's all you have the right to order me to do unless I volunteer myself to do more -- because this is a free country."

Which is why, in the scenario you outline, I would be... less than cooperative.

How does this relate to the Iomedae topic? Simple. As I said a couple days ago, people who are already priests or paladins or suchlike of Iomedae's church -- people who actually are sworn to her service already -- actually can be treated like this by Iomedae, at least semi-legally. The problem is, not all player characters are guaranteed to already be clerics or paladins of, or even lay worshippers of, Iomedae. And by what right can she shanghai in worshippers of other deities or none? They're not members of her church... and the Mendevian Crusade may be sponsored by her church, but its not part of her church. The Commander-In-Chief of the Mendevian Crusade is Queen Galfrey -- in her role as "secular ruler of the kingdom of Mendev", not in her role as "senior paladin of Iomedae".

And you'll notice a total lack of complaint for earlier chapters in this AP where Queen Galfrey showed up and ordered the PCs to 'go here and do this' without asking pretty please first... because the PCs had legitimately enlisted in the Mendevian Crusade in the opening act, and so, she's legitimately their CO.

Iomedae isn't. That's the thing. Your example, in addition to being hilariously out of touch with both American law and culture, isn't even relevant. What Iomedae is doing is more like if President Obama was randomly kidnapping citizens from the European Union and having them dragged to his office... and hey, they've every right to say "What the f~&* is this b*!@~+$*? Let me out of here! I want to talk to my embassy! I'm not even an American! You're not my President!"


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Andrea1 wrote:
Orthos wrote:
Andrea1 wrote:
Cayden: She wasn't joking man! Why do you think I took the test of the Starstone?
Because you were blitzed out of your skull, as I recall.

Calistria:It is because no mortal can withstand my charms. So he got drunk and took the test so he could shag me.

Cayden:LIES!

I'm quite certain would probably rather say something like "Totally the truth!". :p


magnuskn wrote:
Andrea1 wrote:
Orthos wrote:
Andrea1 wrote:
Cayden: She wasn't joking man! Why do you think I took the test of the Starstone?
Because you were blitzed out of your skull, as I recall.

Calistria:It is because no mortal can withstand my charms. So he got drunk and took the test so he could shag me.

Cayden:LIES!

I'm quite certain would probably rather say something like "Totally the truth!". :p

Or maybe . . .

Cayden: LIES! I took the test of the Starstone so I'd be able to shag her again!

As for my earlier point considering it doesn't matter if you say yes or no only that you answer quickly that gets you hammered I'm not so sure that answering I'll go with my instincts would avoid that with the way she's written. I'm also not sure a player wouldn't have a knee jerk yes response considering that pretty much everyone they encounter can be redeemed up to a demon in preceeding volumes unless they do the wrong things.


Orthos wrote:
Odraude wrote:
To be fair, she is the goddess of paladins. I shouldn't be surprised that the Queen of Paladins is everything that is Lawful Stupid.
I'm just going to link the rant I already did on this wretched, flimsy, and pointless excuse for an excuse.

To be fair, you forgot that I later mentioned my glaring omission of /sarcasm ON and /sarcasm OFF...

Although I do feel a perverse amount of pride in the table flip mode comment in your rant. That was gold.

But, I'm still totally in agreement with you and chuckg (whose newsletter I believe I need to subscribe to...) /GRIN.

401 to 450 of 526 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Adventure Path / Wrath of the Righteous / Book 5: Discussion on Iomedae [SPOILERS AHOY!] All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.