|
"the OP is probably bragging about it to the rest of the party"?
Might be jumping to conclusions, but that's the sort of attitude my gut feeling take away is from what the OP is saying is. It seems far to focused on trying to convince people (themselves?) that it's not really evil or wrong, the other player(s) are just being jerks. I think the majority of the Paladin/Alignment issues really come down to that. The one person, (typically either N or some brand of Neutral wants to do something that they dang well know will cause issues, but when other players/characters start having those issues, it's their fault.
I question why the Paladin has not fallen yet for allowing this to go on, (outside of the player not wanting to fight the party and other out of character things). Again, gut feeling I'm getting is that the DM is letting the OP get away with a lot, and the paladin should rightfully be concerned about that. At what point is it "getting away with murder", and will the OP player's justification get them out of that too?
|
Honestly, this sounds more like Neutral Evil to me than anything else. I'm not sure I'd call that Lawful, and it's a fine line on the Neutral/Evil side as well.
What are you doing with the information you glean? Rather, what kind of information are you allowing to be sold by your rogue "front man"? If it's all information, that seems more on the side of evil. If you are selling only information about, say, corrupt officials and other information that is being used "for the greater good," that's more neutral.
Essentially, though, your character is drugging people for profit. That doesn't sound Lawful or Neutral. You mention it not being any more evil than a charm spell, but if you are using charm spells to obtain information to sell, that's still rather evil. It's a very cool and flavorful (heh heh) idea, though, even if I'm not certain the character's alignment reflects his actions.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This sounds more like a metagaming problem than an alignment debate.
Just from what the OP has described, I have plenty of Neutral and Good NPCs who would object to it.
If the paladin knows what you are doing in character, and the paladin tries to stop you in character from doing what you are doing, then that is perfectly fine.But that doesn't sound like what is happening. It sounds like the paladin's player knows what your character is doing, and is trying to break up the party by complaining to the GM out of character based entirely on metagame knowledge!
That is not acceptable behavior for a player, regardless of whether their character is a paladin. If the GM says your alignment is neutral, then your alignment is neutral. The paladin's player knows what the GM thinks, and so knows you are neutral. Alignment is ultimately the GM's call, not the call of forumites, or of the other players!
From just what you've described, the paladin character doesn't know anything. He/she shouldn't be involved at all!
This isn't an in-character issue, it is an OOC issue. From your description (which, of course, is just one side of the story), another PLAYER is metagaming in an effort to punish your character, based only on OOC knowledge.
And, in the case that the paladin character does know about your scheme...he can object to it in character, but it is not acceptable for him to 'haggle with the GM' OOC over your character's alignment.
The main problem is that if the OP's character is, in fact, evil, he would detect as such to the paladin, which would significantly change the paladin's in-game interactions with the OP's character. If the paladin currently doesn't know about the situation in-game, the evil aura should be enough to at least trigger some suspicions.
GMs aren't infallible, either. The GM certainly has the final call, and if the GM says the OP's character's alignment is neutral, that should end the debate. That doesn't mean the GM should completely ignore a player's concerns that someone is committing evil acts while keeping the "benefit" of being neutral.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
You are using mind altering magics on creatures without informed consent for profit.
Yes. Round these parts we call that "being a caster."
The main problem is that if the OP's character is, in fact, evil, he would detect as such to the paladin, ...
Not necessarily, read the spell description.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
In the better neighborhoods we call it "marketing."You are using mind altering magics on creatures without informed consent for profit.Yes. Round these parts we call that "being a caster."
In the highest circles we call it "politics".
|
Well... Paladins aren't allowed to travel or play with 'Evil' characters. Therefore the bakers alignment is VERY relative to the Paladin.
I agree a parties paladin should be improving your parties, and not be the alignment lawyer.
Sure they are. It even says so in their entry. It's just got to be for a damn good reason, and they've got to seek an atonement periodically. I imagine they'd be most likely to cooperate with lawful evil types, as a lot of those can pass themselves off as "good" like nobody's business. Sure, they still ping evil on the metagaming ray--I mean detect evil--but are the most likely to find occasional common ground with lawful derp.
I may have missed it, but what is the spell selection that you used?
A less confrontational one may be a craft boosting item that allows the cooks to consistabtly bake better products and/or making the room more comfortable.
That would remove the "free will" arguments.
But i like the idea.
|
|
Sure they are. It even says so in their entry. It's just got to be for a damn good reason, and they've got to seek an atonement periodically. I imagine they'd be most likely to cooperate with lawful evil types, as a lot of those can pass themselves off as "good" like nobody's business. Sure, they still ping evil on the metagaming ray--I mean detect evil--but are the most likely to find occasional common ground with lawful derp.Well... Paladins aren't allowed to travel or play with 'Evil' characters. Therefore the bakers alignment is VERY relative to the Paladin.
I agree a parties paladin should be improving your parties, and not be the alignment lawyer.
"Associates: While she may adventure with good or neutral allies, a paladin avoids working with evil characters or with anyone who consistently offends her moral code. Under exceptional circumstances, a paladin can ally with evil associates, but only to defeat what she believes to be a greater evil. A paladin should seek an atonement spell periodically during such an unusual alliance, and should end the alliance immediately should she feel it is doing more harm than good. A paladin may accept only henchmen, followers, or cohorts who are lawful good."
Essentially, a paladin can work with an evil character, but it needs to be for a reason. Moreover, a paladin can arguably "play the long game," and try to make the evildoer see the error of their ways, but this is again reasonably contingent on the ability of the paladin to know what the wizard is up to.
|
|
Essentially, a paladin can work with an evil character, but it needs to be for a reason. Moreover, a paladin can arguably "play the long game," and try to make the evildoer see the error of their ways, but this is again reasonably contingent on the ability of the paladin to know what the wizard is up to.
It can also make for a good plot hook to have the paladin turn rabid, so to speak. A sufficiently powerful, sufficiently restrained (and well thought) evil could probably lead one down the dark path; makes for a very interesting story.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It can also make for a good plot hook to have the paladin turn rabid, so to speak. A sufficiently powerful, sufficiently restrained (and well thought) evil could probably lead one down the dark path; makes for a very interesting story.
Essentially, a paladin can work with an evil character, but it needs to be for a reason. Moreover, a paladin can arguably "play the long game," and try to make the evildoer see the error of their ways, but this is again reasonably contingent on the ability of the paladin to know what the wizard is up to.
Yes- but ONLY with the paladin players approval. Obviously, in this case, that isn't coming.
Would it be OK for a superstitious BBN to burn the wizard's spellbook as a 'ex-wizard learning to make his way in the world with the crutch of magic" makes for a good story? Would it be OK for the paladin to lock up our evil Baker/wizard in a room and convert him to Good against his will? I mean- redemption of Evil makes for a GREAT story!!!
But you don't get to change other peoples character's without their permission.
Too many posters here are basing their arguments on the fact they don't like paladins or the PF alignment system.
Note that we have requested the OP to have the other player give his side, the OP has not done so. This means that the OP is not giving us a fair or unbiased story. Hmm, actually the Op hasn't even bothered to posy ANY reply at all, and this is only the Op's second post. Very suspicious.
|
|
Still sounds to me like the paladin is being the jerk, judging PURELY by what we currently know. It is very possible the OP is in the wrong, yes, but we'll never know without a reply. Still, it's just as possible these actions aren't evil in the GMs campaign. They are allowed to change where the lines are after all. Kind of hoping more information gets posted up. Wouldn't mind hearing from the paladin, honestly.
I don't think the Paladin is being a jerk, I think he's being a Paladin. This is why anyone who wants to play a paladin really needs to sit down and have a conversation with the other players about expectations before starting the campaign.
Personally I love this kind of mastermind character but there is no way you are going to be able to get along with a Paladin. You two need to talk and decide on some sort of compromise. Otherwise it will just continue to be a big conflict and get in the way of the game for the other players.
Wow. I was hoping for a few replies but I didn't expect three pages worth over night. It took a bit to read through everything but the general response seems to be leaning towards it's evil. Maybe I should explain a few things more as well as answer some of the questions that seem to keep being asked.
First, It is not the Paladin I have a problem with. Keltos knows full well what kind of business Ras Thavas runs and he is careful never to eat there. Nick, who plays Keltos however, is the one I have trouble with. Nothing has been said in game. It's all coming from Nick straight to the GM.
Second, I don't see the spell aspect of things as evil. If I cast a charm spell on someone in the middle of a fight so they don't hit me in the face or out of a fight so they will spill all of their secrets about the BBEG no one says a thing. Both uses are self serving and subvert the will of others certainly, but Evil? Even when, in the second case, I am likely to use the knowledge I gain to shove a lightning bolt up someone's hind end, everyone just takes it in stride. It's ok to subvert someone's will for your benefit in one instance but not another?
The side job angle doesn't take away from the game. The GM and I talked it out before hand and most of the business side of things happens off camera so to speak. I do role play it a little but the day to day business is handled mostly by two very skilled bakers that I keep employed and when I am out of town they just run it as a normal bakery. Although we are based in Magnimar we do travel a good bit and I assure you I am just as murderous as any other hobo.
Now for the big one, what do I do with the money and the info? I'm not going to lie, some of both benefit me directly. A lot of it does not. The whole point for setting this up was never the money, it was always about information. Most of the money is a side benefit from the info I pick up. As for the money, it has been used to fund materials for various crafting projects. Every single party member is using at least one item that I was able to make for them free of charge. It also feeds countless poor people around town (who in turn pass on any tidbits of secrets they may hear). And when I have to deal with someone like a noble or city official who is not evil and does not warrant blackmail or aggressive negotiations it gets used to make donations to a charity or some such thing that will net me a positive response from that individual. Sometimes I just outright buy information as well. The information itself gets used for a variety of things. I sell a lot of it. That isn't necessarily something sinister. Many people will pay good money just to know what a business rival or romantic rival has been up to lately. Sometimes I use it for blackmail. That gets used against people who deserve it. Is it evil to blackmail a would be necromancer to leave town before he can cause trouble? When at all possible I try to gather information that will benefit the party directly with whatever adventure (hobo murder spree) we happen to be on at the time. All of that is self serving but is it really something to cause an alignment shift? I don't think so.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
It's ok to subvert someone's will for your benefit in one instance but not another?
Kinda. Subverting free will is a harm, the same way stabbing someone is a harm. Charm person is not [Evil] for the same reason fireball isn't: there is a time and a place.
The onus is on the user to ensure that they're using the effect to make the world a better place: that the lesser harm is justified by a greater good.
Indiscriminately drugging or charming the populace into giving you money and information is probably an Evil act. But that doesn't mean your character is Evil, because you may do Good things with that information.
It's ok to subvert someone's will for your benefit in one instance but not another?Kinda. Subverting free will is a harm, the same way stabbing someone is a harm. Charm person is not [Evil] for the same reason fireball isn't: there is a time and a place.
The onus is on the user to ensure that they're using the effect to make the world a better place: that the lesser harm is justified by a greater good.
Indiscriminately drugging or charming the populace into giving you money and information is probably an Evil act. But that doesn't mean your character is Evil, because you may do Good things with that information.
Right.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
As someone firmly in the camp of pro-LE alignments, I have to say you are well on your way to the Dark Side (perhaps we can get you to bake some of the cookies we offer?)
On the other hand, several of your statements are ambiguous enough that you may indeed be one of those annoying LN Abadar sorts that fund and are supported by the institution of slavery, but somehow are less smite-worthy than the devout of Red Mantis who are just trying to keep a bit of balance in the world.
First off, what magic are you actually using in your cookies? … if you’re using magic to enhance your Profession: Baker skill so that they’re even more delectable and have crafted an artifact wooden spoon that instantly analyzes all of the ingredients of your competitors’ wares then you’re not very far down the path towards the Dark Force Lightning tricks.
Second, what code/credo/etc. do you support that you get the “Lawful” part of LN? Frankly, the L seems a bit closer to the N unless you have a greater purpose / higher calling than “make money & trade info”.
The differences in using enchantment / compulsion effects comes down to a similar argument for determining if someone is a “good person” – what you use your power for on those who are unable to resist / protest your actions. In this case, yeah, not looking good on the G-N-E meter. You aren’t using your magics on viable threats and instead are using them to wear down the resolve of those who are your neighbors and potential allies. You may even be endangering them if they are ever in the wrong place at the wrong time and have the lingering magic aura detected from them (unless of course, like a true professional, you always bake non-detection safe guards into every pastry.)
Professionally, I’m curious what safeguards you are using to make sure that your stooges … er, innocent and valued customers … aren’t be used to feed you false information so that you can be used as a cut-out and a puppet as your information sources will radiate magic for a time… or if you had yet considered that vulnerability in your network.
Thus far, I’m leaning towards N or N(E) in old terms of perceived alignment.
-TimD
(who is a fan of both LE alignments & paladins and thinks that PF would be a far poorer game without alignment, but must admit the sometimes toxic alignment debates make him miss CyberPunk 2013 & Paranoia even more)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If I cast a charm spell on someone in the middle of a fight so they don't hit me in the face ...
Difference. You are actively engaged in a fight and using the charm spell on hostiles, not on random bakery patrons.
... or out of a fight so they will spill all of their secrets about the BBEG no one says a thing.
Difference. You're using the spell on a target that you know to have information on a known BBEG, not on random bakery patrons that most likely know of no such things.
Both uses are self serving and subvert the will of others certainly, but Evil? Even when, in the second case, I am likely to use the knowledge I gain to shove a lightning bolt up someone's hind end, everyone just takes it in stride. It's ok to subvert someone's will for your benefit in one instance but not another?
Goes to motive. Self-defense ? Ok. The greater good ? Possibly Ok. Your profit or convenience ? Probably not OK.
The whole point for setting this up was never the money, it was always about information.
Which you proceed to indiscriminately sell through an intermediary with no regard to any harm it may cause.
That isn't necessarily something sinister. Many people will pay good money just to know what a business rival or romantic rival has been up to lately.
So with this purchased information, your customer could possibly ruin his honest competition who doesn't engage in such things.
|
|
Ok for the OP, this is what I get from your posts.
Your character is Neutral.
What you are doing isnt lawful in anyway. You bribe the poor to gather information. You bribe the city officails or nobility to hopefully get a positive response. You bribe your party members so they have less of a problem with what your doing.
The party paladin is falling even if the player of said paladin doesnt know it.
This is just me though.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
What you are doing isnt lawful in anyway. You bribe the poor to gather information. You bribe the city officails or nobility to hopefully get a positive response. You bribe your party members so they have less of a problem with what your doing.
I disagree. It's organized and methodical, and the goal seems to be increased control via the provided information. Those are all Lawful traits.
Bribery is illegal, but the 'Law' part of 'Lawful' is the opposite of chaos: It's a synonym for 'Order'. It does not mean 'Legal'.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If I cast a charm spell on someone in the middle of a fight so they don't hit me in the face or out of a fight so they will spill all of their secrets about the BBEG no one says a thing.
But in the middle of a fight the situation is one where you might already use violent force without being Evil, or otherwise vs. specific NPCs whom you have specific reason to cross their boundaries because that line has already been passed, or they are working with people that cause that line to have already been passed. This is about random passer-bys and going on a fishing trip to further your personal ends, even if some of those are "good minded". Good =/= The Ends Justify The Means.
when I have to deal with someone like a noble or city official who is not evil and does not warrant blackmail or aggressive negotiations it gets used to make donations to a charity or some such thing that will net me a positive response from that individual.
Ah, so you know better then them how to spend their money? Obviously if they really wanted to donate that $, they already could have done so. Imposing your will on random people, specifically these ones that are "not evil and [don't] warrant blackmail" sounds kind of Evil. That you are using means like this to gain large amounts of money, not from targetted people who ALL deserve it, but from people at large and you just happen to specially target non-Evil people for FURTHER outrages, means you are robbing the general populace. It would be 100% unacceptable for another PC to rob YOU via means like this, even if they spent some of it on "good deeds", even if they spent some it buying YOU nice gear.
The information itself gets used for a variety of things. I sell a lot of it. That isn't necessarily something sinister. Many people will pay good money just to know what a business rival or romantic rival has been up to lately.
Uh... disrupting other people's lives and businesses based on who will pay you money? Sounds Evil.
That you're using a 3rd party to sell any information you have no personal use for means a certain amount of this is out of your control, you simply can't make good moral judgements re: the seller, although clearly these admitted cases of clients using unethically derived information to their personal benefit/to the original party's detriment are directly Evil ends.All of that is self serving but is it really something to cause an alignment shift? I don't think so.
You're clearly in denial that MANY aspects of that are Evil. Whether that shifts your Alignment to Evil is another question, but the idea that you are't doing anything Evil is a joke. Even if your Alignment is not Evil, the Paladin would certainly be motivated to stop Evil actions from occuring. "Neutral" NPCs can in fact be "enemies" you might end up fighting a typical heroic adventure.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What you are doing isnt lawful in anyway.I disagree. It's organized and methodical, and the goal seems to be increased control via the provided information. Those are all Lawful traits.
Bribery is illegal, but the 'Law' part of 'Law' is the opposite of chaos: It's a synonym for 'Order'. It does not mean 'Legal'.
Totally agree. Further, the length and degree to which he is JUSTIFYING his actions in convulated ways is appropo to Lawful Alignment. This type of plot is the exact type of thing a LE character would be involved with. Likewise, corrupt officials are likely LE, even though they may commit some "crimes", they largely function in a Lawful way.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think this is pretty darn evil. That doesn't matter though so much as the other issues.
First, the other player absolutely has a right to talk to the GM and 'try and convince him' you are evil. Since he is playing a Paladin, it is pretty darn important for him to understand what the GM thinks is good and evil and in between. It also does effect his character dramatically. If people can go around running magical compulsion information gathering and blackmail rings without showing up as evil, that changes things for a Paladin.
Second, I'm pretty sure you are completely cheating. I can't think of anyway that you could create the effects you describe by 'enchanting' pastries. Now, you are having fun with it, and your GM seems ok with it, and too an extent that is fine. But there is a very real chance that at least one other player finds this unfair and feels that is is lessening their fun. Even without the extreme bending of the rules that would be a problem, with it, it is a big problem. You said you think he is jealous, if he is, he has every right to be as you are getting special treatment.
You and the other player and the GM need to have a talk. You need to try not to be easily offended and have an open mind, and hopefully you can find a way that everyone has fun and no one feels left out.
Yes, the thing about applying the Compulsion enchants to SO MANY pastries is that they WILL certainly be detected, just from somebody using Detect Magic for some other reason, and a pastry happening to be in the AoE: "Hmmm... Isn't that interesting?" Constabulary using magic in investigations would quickly become rather interested in compulsion magic pastries appearing all over the city. Only using magic for a small infrequent number of pastries is less likely to be noticed right away, but can be revealed by the same means.
|
|
I think this is pretty darn evil. That doesn't matter though so much as the other issues.
First, the other player absolutely has a right to talk to the GM and 'try and convince him' you are evil. Since he is playing a Paladin, it is pretty darn important for him to understand what the GM thinks is good and evil and in between. It also does effect his character dramatically. If people can go around running magical compulsion information gathering and blackmail rings without showing up as evil, that changes things for a Paladin.
Second, I'm pretty sure you are completely cheating. I can't think of anyway that you could create the effects you describe by 'enchanting' pastries. Now, you are having fun with it, and your GM seems ok with it, and too an extent that is fine. But there is a very real chance that at least one other player finds this unfair and feels that is is lessening their fun. Even without the extreme bending of the rules that would be a problem, with it, it is a big problem. You said you think he is jealous, if he is, he has every right to be as you are getting special treatment.
You and the other player and the GM need to have a talk. You need to try not to be easily offended and have an open mind, and hopefully you can find a way that everyone has fun and no one feels left out.
I see nothing here that would imply special treatment. We have no information that would lead us to believe the GM wouldn't do some home brewing for the rest of the party as well, if asked.
Yes, the thing about applying the Compulsion enchants to SO MANY pastries is that they WILL certainly be detected, just from somebody using Detect Magic for some other reason, and a pastry happening to be in the AoE: "Hmmm... Isn't that interesting?" Constabulary using magic in investigations would quickly become rather interested in compulsion magic pastries appearing all over the city. Only using magic for a small infrequent number of pastries is less likely to be noticed right away, but can be revealed by the same means.
Magic aura could hide the auras from cantrip-level magic.
I see nothing here that would imply special treatment. We have no information that would lead us to believe the GM wouldn't do some home brewing for the rest of the party as well, if asked.You said you think he is jealous, if he is, he has every right to be as you are getting special treatment.
The OP said he thought the other player was jealous. That leads one to believe the other player doesn't think the situation is fair. If, the other player thought they were going to be playing using the rules, and not coming up with special enchanted pastry rules, for example. Making special rules for one player is special treatment.
Perhaps the GM would have done it for others, but even if he would have, it certainly appears he has not (hence the jealousy) and so the treatment the one player is getting is indeed special.
There are multiple ways that can be solved. Talking about it is the first step.
Yes, the thing about applying the Compulsion enchants to SO MANY pastries is that they WILL certainly be detected, just from somebody using Detect Magic for some other reason, and a pastry happening to be in the AoE: "Hmmm... Isn't that interesting?" Constabulary using magic in investigations would quickly become rather interested in compulsion magic pastries appearing all over the city. Only using magic for a small infrequent number of pastries is less likely to be noticed right away, but can be revealed by the same means.Magic aura could hide the auras from cantrip-level magic.
Of for sure, Magic Aura doesn't even have any Spell Level limit for what it covers up (it just doesn't work on Artifacts). But Magic Aura is a 1st level spell, not a Cantrip, so if he's putting out hundreds of Compulsion Cookies on a regular basis just to attract/addict customers, that's ALOT of non-unlimited spell slots/scrolls If you just use Magic Aura for a few SPECIFIC pastries, i.e. the Mind Reading ones targetted for specific use, then it is more reasonable, although still a signifigant expense/ daily drain on spell slots (relevant when adventures pop up out of nowhere).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
First, in my previous post I meant to thank everyone for their thoughts and opinions so thank you all.
Now for some specific responses.
Personally I love this I've never heard of a bakery spy mastery it's awesome.
I like this, you sir are a brilliant madman!
If no one dies because of your charms I would say you aren't evil. Heck I think charming someone in combat is a lot worse. Oh and that is the single coolest thing ever. Baker spy master wizard that has his finger in every pie. Quite literally in some cases, eh?
Thanks. In any game I play I try to do something original and avoid just going for maxed out stats and the same old hack and slash. Characters with an original concept are always more fun to play.
Hehehe. I dont think that's bad enough to make you evil (although it does lean in that direction), it might bring you towards true neutral (in my humble opinion).-Addiction thing: evil, not super-evil, but evil nonetheless, more because of the fact people dont know than for the adictive effects.
-Information-gathering: that's legit. What do you think a bartender does? He uses alcohol, you use magic, no big difference.Still, nice to see someone not being a murderhobo. My current magus character has a buttload of ranks in craft (clockwork) so maybe I should start a side-business...
Addiction might be a strong term. I did say I didn't want people developing an addiction in my OP. It's more of a spell that makes them very desirable not irresistible.
Clockworks huh? Little magical desk clocks that record whatever they hear and pass the info on to a bigger clock built into that giant tower at the center of town? How evil of you sir lol.
Depends on what kind of information you sell and who you sell it into but other than that i don't find it evil at all.
My question is though, how do you do it? what spells and in what way do you do it?
Well a lot of it is behind the scenes so we don't slow down play. I went to the GM out of game and told him in detail what I wanted to do. Obviously I am using custom spells that the GM and I talked over. I usually just craft a few wands and use them whenever I want to make magic cupcakes or whatever. I mean put a spell on the cupcakes not create them outright.
Rynjin I am not going to quote your post because it is very lengthy but I found it quite remarkable. It did also provoke quite a laugh from me. In a good way.
You're the stuff adventures are made of - basically a plot hook."Sir Reginald IV calls for adventurers to investigate the happenings of a bakery in town that the villagers seem to be drawn to. It's suspected that foul magic play is afoot. Whatever the cause, it must be stopped before the town is held completely hostage to the whims of the bakery!"
Sir Reginald would find, much to his sorrow, that I wield a considerable amount of influence in Magnimar and the city guards would be happy to escort him right out of town for those kinds of antics.
If I started selling nicotine (for a relatively harmless addiction) and sodium pentathol (for loose lips) brownies to people without telling them what was in them, I'd go to jail.If I started lacing people's drinks to make them more talkative than they thought they would get, that's clearly wrong.
That guy who promised his wife he'd cut back on sweets is now betraying that promise, not because he's weak willed, but because you forced him. (And it might not be as 'trivial' as losing weight: perhaps the local barber-dentist has had to pull a few too many of his teeth, or even though he's not 'poor', he's trying to do the equivalent of cutting the latte habit and save a few coppers a day to save for the future.)
F+$$ing with others' free will for fun and profit is exactly what LE does. (You say you're not making money, but information is valuable too.)
Some people are commenting to the effect of 'You magnificent bastard, I wish I'd thought of that'. Magnificent Bastards are often LE.
Your justification seems to be 'I don't see myself as a bad person, how can I be evil?' Evil people never think they're bad people. They think they're clever people. Or 'special' people. The hero of their own story. Only poorly written cartoons eat a basket of puppies just to prove their evil cred.
TL;DR: If you have to explain why it isn't Evil, it's usually Evil. If you are hurting others for your own gain, that is the definition of Evil.
This is where I have to point out how my opinion differs from what a lot of people seem to be going with. I NEVER said I was GOOD. Just not EVIL. It seems like the consensus is that if I am not being good I must be evil. As I see it a neutral character is not defined by just one or the other. It is a mix of both. Otherwise they would just be one or the other. Is some of what I am doing on the shady side? Yes, absolutely. Is it good by definition? Certainly not. Does that make it evil? I don't think so.
Quote:A lawful evil villain methodically takes what he wants within the limits of his code of conduct without regard for whom it hurts. He cares about tradition, loyalty, and order, but not about freedom, dignity, or life. He plays by the rules but without mercy or compassion. He is comfortable in a hierarchy and would like to rule, but is willing to serve.
You're not being chaotic. You're carefully operating well within the law. However, you're trampling on free will and not giving informed consent. So you do not give a rat's ass about other being's dignity or well-being.
This is about the perfect textbook example of an evil character that would cause a Paladin to fall if they smote them for merely for detecting as evil.
You're evil, but in such a mundane and low-level way that killing you for it, or even harming you, would be a greater evil.
If he wants to really be a paladin in this matter, he should be trying to make people aware of what you're doing and/or trying to convince you it's wrong.
A paladin has more options than a binary "Evil Yes/No --> Smite Yes/No".
I will point out that at no time have I deprived anyone of their freedom (or free will as I did specifically say I didn't want them to be an addiction) nor have I damaged their dignity in any way. Also it says life not well being. A minor distinction but in any case I have not caused any deaths or even bodily harm.
I feel like creating a character and coming after your bakery, sword, spellbook and quick wits in hand.This foul play must be stopped !!
Here, have a cupcake. I promise it will MAKE you feel better.
[fails save vs alignment thread]
"they walk down the street and see the bake shop and say "I know the wife wants me to loose a few pounds but their pastries are SO GOOD! Just one won't hurt". A slightly less benign spell makes the patron a little more chatty (and truthful)"Not the same The Beard. His example is mind control. I admit the how he uses it is very important, which seems to be OK for now. But it is theft of will and coin, a bit Robin Hood like if the targets were causing harm.
I'm not mind controlling anyone. Have a few drinks and the average person will get more chatty. That doesn't make the bartender evil. Nothing wrong with compelling someone to be truthful either. It's not nice but that's not the same as evil.
The Beard wrote:What is wrong with maintaining a side business as a source of income?
Two things here. I wasn't talking necessarily about what the OP was doing with this question. I was asking another poster directly why an adventurer shouldn't be allowed to have a side business.Because we're not playing cubicles and careers. There are scads of economic games out there- play Settlers of Catan. I mean, you have a chance to play a true Fantasy hero, one who legends are made of, and instead you want to spend time ordering flour, exchanging recipes and counting coppers in the till. It's mundane and boring. He can do that during his work 40 hours, not during the games very limited few hours.
I think you may be jumping to a few conclusions. As it happens we (the GM and I) go out of our way to make sure this mostly stays in the back ground and doesn't slow play. It's meant to add to the game not make it a night of fun with accounting.
Korthis wrote:As to good or evil; I'd say it's not evil because you aren't harming the people (or creating an addiction), at the very least it's no more evil than if you had cast the spell...
Addiction is as addiction does. Note the OP says that he doesn't addict people, he just uses a psychotropic element (in this case, magical) to get them to want his stuff against their better judgment, thus forcing them to pay to devour his baked goods by the dozen.
LOL!
I can't imagine a bigger bag of BS. That's the very definition of addiction. Just because he tries to say it isn't, doesn't mean we can't use our own common sense.
Of course he's evil. He is a the epicenter of a web of deceit, information theft, addiction, lies, falsification, fraud... need I go on?
I mean, I like what he's got going. It sounds like a fun turn of events. But to paraphrase what I said above (and Forrest Gump for the second time) evil is as evil does. And he does evil.
He does evil right like KFC does chicken.
Umm.. Thanks? I think.
Just for the record, deceit (a little), information theft (compulsion, maybe), addiction (no), lies (no), falsification (where?) fraud (we'll call that marketing)...
So, what happens when a magically inclined member of the watch wonders about the popularity of these pastries and casts detect magic on one?
If that happens I just point out that I could use a ton of sugar (expensive) to get the desired taste at the cost of the patron gaining weight or other health problems or just give it a little calorie free magic.
I should point out that not everything that goes through the door is enchanted. In fact the majority of it is not. I'm not made of magic.
Ok, Two pages worth of posts to respond to is all I have time for right now. Anything I didn't get to will have to wait.
A better question, rules wise, might be how is this being paid for?
If the pastries are full-on magic items, they're costing a handful of gold each to make, minimum.
If you're using spells with durations, the minor addiction effect and the talkative effect are pretty crappy first level spells, but they're certainly more than cantrips. And then you're adding a magic aura if you don't want to get caught fairly quickly, which is a first level spell.
How many spells per day do your employees have?
Paladins aren't allowed to travel or play with 'Evil' characters...They're specifically allowed to. Doesn't mean they shouldn't try to do anything about it, but they're allowed to work with known Evil if doing so furthers the cause of the greater good, etc.
Yep, there are exceptions that let the game actually progress with a mixed party like that.
But it isn't THAT lenient either...
While she may adventure with good or
neutral allies, a paladin avoids working with evil characters
or with anyone who consistently offends her moral code.
Under exceptional circumstances, a paladin can ally
with evil associates, but only to defeat what she believes
to be a greater evil. A paladin should seek an atonement
spell periodically during such an unusual alliance, and
should end the alliance immediately should she feel it is
doing more harm than good.
yep for the greater good... Which is in itself a tricky situation. If you need the evil character to help you beat the megaevil... then the party can stay together.
However, it sounds like there is a LOT of downtime to accomplish this scenario. Doesn't sound like there is any particular 'greater evil' that needs him to work with the lesser one at the moment...
We're playing kingmaker and years can pass by. My paladin would not be able to associate with an actual 'evil character' in the council just because he keeps the trains on schedule. Not without Atonements for me...
Now, if we're preparing for Cthulu to come stomp the countryside... yeah, We'll stand side by side... for now.
A lot of it has a basis on what the actual campaign is like... but having the paladin wanting to make sure that HE won't need an atonement just so Twinkie the kid can keep his blackmail scheme going....
It's not THAT uncalled for.
Again, provided it's 'in character' knowledge... but then I have a few 'questionable' allies that I do a quick scan once in a while for just to be safe myself. ;)
|
|
I think my old party's paladin would've had an aneurysm if they ever succssfully used detect evil on my spell caster. That thing probably did more damage to the world than Aroden's death did to Golarion, and let me assure you, it was all completely intentional. ... But a high bluff score coupled with undetectable alignment, some damn fine acting skills, and working through simulacrums and proxies half the time had that paladin thinking it and the magic user were like two peas in a pod. ... Two lawful good peas in a pod, might I add.
He spawned his own undead nation by sending a swarm of plague zombies into a major city; it snowballed from there to devour several surrounding countries. Never got traced to him. Slowly but surely, this character's actions were decimating the world they lived in. It became a lich right under everyone's noses; still didn't get found out until just before the final battle, and even then he was able to convince them that his "condition" was gained against his will. He whipped around and blasted the entire party with a maximized cone of cold after the boss fell, my lich having used its absurdly high bluff score to convince them his spells were depleted. Bright side? I'll bet they made for some really powerful minions. THIS is evil, this is extreme evil, but overly cerebral evil played with a healthy touch of style.
The OP, on the other hand, probably shouldn't take an alignment hit. But if they do? There are lots of awkwardly simple yet ridiculously effective means of putting off a false alignment reading.
Second, I'm pretty sure you are completely cheating. I can't think of anyway that you could create the effects you describe by 'enchanting' pastries. Now, you are having fun with it, and your GM seems ok with it, and too an extent that is fine. But there is a very real chance that at least one other player finds this unfair and feels that is is lessening their fun. Even without the extreme bending of the rules that would be a problem, with it, it is a big problem. You said you think he is jealous, if he is, he has every right to be as you are getting special treatment.
Cheating is a strong word... It has to be a homemade spell, which is completely legal and in the CRB under 'adding new spells' in the magic section.
Most games I've been in, some caster tries to come up with something unique to him...
As for this? this one seems pretty straight forward... There used to be an 'unquenchable thirst' spell in 2E.. not sure if it's still around. I can't seem to find it... We also have crafters fortune that would just make you the best baker around without bothering with the 'enchantment' aspect.
I could even see some kind of permanent 'zone of charm' effect being put on the door... just to keep any rowdy fights from breaking out. I know when "I" see a cream pie I just want to SMASH it in someones face.... preventative measures officer... when you leave you'll be back to your old surly self. In here... we're all friends!
We're the FRIENDLIEST bakery around!!! :D
Question.
If the bakery products were make using mundane drugs to do the same thing as the spells are doing, would it change how everyone feels about it?
That does bring up one of the better ways to handle any issue of ethics when it comes to magic: If it would be wrong to do something via mundane methods (like selling brownies laced with drugs) then it would be wrong to do it using magic.