Antipaladins and Lycanthropy


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion


The idea of a Werewolf Antipaladin is super cool and kind of an obvious fit, but there's this potential wrench in the gears-

Plague Bringer wrote:


the powers of darkness make an antipaladin a beacon of corruption and disease. An antipaladin does not take any damage or take any penalty from diseases. He can still contract diseases and spread them to others, but he is otherwise immune to their effects.

Plague Bringer makes note of damage and penalties but leaves out any potential benefits a disease might bestow.

The question is, can antipaladins even become lycanthropes.

Lycanthropy is listed as a Curse, but the description of it (and the cure) specifically call it out as a disease. It seems to be both.

So, by my reading there's a few possibilities-

1) Lycanthropy is a Curse, does not count as a Disease and effects the Antipaladin normally (I call this the boring option).

2) Antipaladins can only be carriers of lycanthropy, sort of like a werewolf Typhoid Mary, passing anger and hair growth everywhere they go. The trail of spawned manbeasts would be almost impossible to track back to the anti paladin (great option for a mystery-oriented game plot)

3) Antipaladins can become lycanthropes, but are actually immune to the drawbacks of the disease. They don't go crazy under the full moon, they don't have any of the usual signs, they might not even have a weakness to silver. (Antipaladins make the best lycanthropes. This seems powerful, but rather appropriate.)

Thoughts?

What about Vampirism?

Mummy Rot?


Who said he wasnt a lycanthrope BEFORE he became an anti-paladin?


Kryzbyn wrote:
Who said he wasnt a lycanthrope BEFORE he became an anti-paladin?

Good question.

So, if a lycanthrope becomes an anti paladin, what happens when they hit third level and pick up Plague Bringer?


From the looks of the text he would be a carrier. Able to pass it on to others through bite but unable to tranform himself. He wouldn't get any of the benefits, really. It requires you to succumb to the curse/disease.


Captain Wacky wrote:
From the looks of the text he would be a carrier. Able to pass it on to others through bite but unable to tranform himself. He wouldn't get any of the benefits, really. It requires you to succumb to the curse/disease.

Alright, let's explore this idea.

What if they were a lycanthrope first. Would Plague Bringer just suppress the disease?


I suppose it depends on the nature of lycanthropy in the game though. If it's a curse, I suppose he'd transform like anyone else, disease? he'd probably be a carrier. If it's some sort of comination... well, GMs disgression.


Doomed Hero wrote:
Captain Wacky wrote:
From the looks of the text he would be a carrier. Able to pass it on to others through bite but unable to tranform himself. He wouldn't get any of the benefits, really. It requires you to succumb to the curse/disease.

Alright, let's explore this idea.

What if they were a lycanthrope first. Would Plague Bringer just suppress the disease?

That's how I would rule it.

EDIT as it stands in RAW PF, this is how I would rule. Lycanthropy works differently in my games though.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Maps, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Doomed Hero wrote:
Captain Wacky wrote:
From the looks of the text he would be a carrier. Able to pass it on to others through bite but unable to tranform himself. He wouldn't get any of the benefits, really. It requires you to succumb to the curse/disease.

Alright, let's explore this idea.

What if they were a lycanthrope first. Would Plague Bringer just suppress the disease?

I think lycanthropy is only a disease or curese if you were infected with it. If you inherited it, you get to change into an animal pretty much any time you want to and have no real downside to your condition.


Doomed Hero wrote:
Kryzbyn wrote:
Who said he wasnt a lycanthrope BEFORE he became an anti-paladin?

Good question.

So, if a lycanthrope becomes an anti paladin, what happens when they hit third level and pick up Plague Bringer?

Nothing. If he's a natural lycanthrope and not cursed.

If he is cursed...well, I'd guess that anything that happened before he was an AP would still be in effect.

RPG Superstar 2009 Top 16

And then there's Natural Lycanthropes


David knott 242 wrote:
Doomed Hero wrote:
Captain Wacky wrote:
From the looks of the text he would be a carrier. Able to pass it on to others through bite but unable to tranform himself. He wouldn't get any of the benefits, really. It requires you to succumb to the curse/disease.

Alright, let's explore this idea.

What if they were a lycanthrope first. Would Plague Bringer just suppress the disease?

I think lycanthropy is only a disease or curese if you were infected with it. If you inherited it, you get to change into an animal pretty much any time you want to and have no real downside to your condition.

Again, it depends on the nature of lycanthropy in your game. That can very much be true. And that's how it works in my games.

But also, I can see downsides if your family has a long history of cancer. Just because you were born with a thing doesn't mean you can control it. It might work differantly in other worlds.


RAW, I'm going to have to go with (1) - Werewolf Lycanthropy is clearly listed as a curse, not a disease, and as such affects an antipaladin normally. From the CRB:

Quote:

Werewolf Lycanthropy

Type curse, injury; Save Fortitude DC 15 negates, Will DC 15 to avoid effects
Onset the next full moon; Frequency on the night of every full moon or whenever the target is injured
Effect target transforms into a wolf under the GM's control until the next morning

Moreover, attacks by werewolves are described as bestowing the "curse of lycanthropy".

Where does it call lycanthropy out as a disease? I see some references to "contracting" it, but that's hardly a slam-dunk case.


aegrisomnia wrote:

RAW, I'm going to have to go with (1) - Werewolf Lycanthropy is clearly listed as a curse, not a disease, and as such affects an antipaladin normally. From the CRB:

Quote:

Werewolf Lycanthropy

Type curse, injury; Save Fortitude DC 15 negates, Will DC 15 to avoid effects
Onset the next full moon; Frequency on the night of every full moon or whenever the target is injured
Effect target transforms into a wolf under the GM's control until the next morning

Moreover, attacks by werewolves are described as bestowing the "curse of lycanthropy".

Where does it call lycanthropy out as a disease? I see some references to "contracting" it, but that's hardly a slam-dunk case.

Ahh, I stand corrected.


With the addition of this information handed to us by aegrisomnia. Assuming you're playing RAW I'll have to go with this ruling.

Plague Bringer states it supresses diseases.
As lycanthropy is RAW, a curse, Plague Bringer has no effect on it and thus anti-paladins will succumb to it like any other slob.

Thank you for this needed bit of info aegrisomnia.


Well, the good news is that the boring, balanced option looks right - the character can still be a werewolf, and doesn't get some weird game-breakingly strong synergy from being an antipaladin. Sounds like the best of all possible outcomes, really.


For the first three days after being afflicted, Remove Disease or Heal will cure a lycanthrope. After that, Remove Curse works.

This is from the SRD entry, describing it as both in the same sentence.

Quote:
Lycanthropy is a curse, and while some unscrupulous types may seek this “gift of the moon,” voluntary contraction of the disease is rare.


I stand by the RAW ruling as it's stated in the book as being primarily a curse.

However, if lycanthropy is something differant in your game, rule as you see fit.


If it helps, here's how things work in my world.

In my world dieases are evil spirits, not infections from viruses or bacteria.

Lycanthropy is a possesion by a lycanthropic animal spirit. It grows strong as the full moon approches and eventually takes control. The longer it remains attached to the host, the more time it has to root itsslf into the hosts soul. Eventually if it goes untreated it will consume and replace the soul. It will have your memories, but the person will be gone. Smiliar to demonic possession but it can be passed down familial lines, children being born with animal spirits as opposed to souls. There can be "families" of lycanthropes spawning from a single source.

In this instance, an anti-paladin would never lose control of himself but be possesed by the spirit. During this stage he could pass on lycanthropy to others through bite. Once the spirit has consumed his soul he would be a full lycanthrope and lose any and all powers associated with his class as he no longer has a soul to connect him to his god. All in all it's a bad deal for them. But this is my world.

Silver Crusade

Going by Paizo Fluff (Worldwound Campaign Setting) Werewolf Anitpaladins are viable. Rules wise, I don't know.


This is easy to solve.

Ravenloft.

It cant be dispeled by any means if it was caused by a dreadlord.


Doomed Hero wrote:

For the first three days after being afflicted, Remove Disease or Heal will cure a lycanthrope. After that, Remove Curse works.

This is from the SRD entry, describing it as both in the same sentence.

Quote:
Lycanthropy is a curse, and while some unscrupulous types may seek this “gift of the moon,” voluntary contraction of the disease is rare.

Where does it say that Remove Disease / Heal works on Werewolf Lycanthropy in the first three days?

The flavor text you quote is confusing, granted, but two things to note: (1) this is fluff, not crunch, and it's dangerous to interpret fluff as crunch when there's not some other reason to believe the fluff text has any mechanical implications; (2) "disease" can be and, in fact, is often used in a literary or figurative sense, as in "Nationalism is an infantile disease" (Albert Einstein), "The biggest disease today is not leprosy or tuberculosis, but of being unwanted" (Mother Teresa), "Love is a serious mental disease" (Plato), "To cure the British disease with Socialism was like trying to cure leukemia with leeches" (Margaret Thatcher), etc. In fact, until fairly recently in human history, the distinction between a "diseases" and "curses" was pretty hazy... and the default setting for Pathfinder was before any real distinction was drawn, in any event.


aegrisomnia wrote:
Doomed Hero wrote:

For the first three days after being afflicted, Remove Disease or Heal will cure a lycanthrope. After that, Remove Curse works.

This is from the SRD entry, describing it as both in the same sentence.

Quote:
Lycanthropy is a curse, and while some unscrupulous types may seek this “gift of the moon,” voluntary contraction of the disease is rare.
Where does it say that Remove Disease / Heal works on Werewolf Lycanthropy in the first three days?
SRD, bestiary entry on lycanthropes wrote:


Spells like Remove Disease and Heal are definitive and safer ways to break the curse, as long as they are cast by a holy person of sufficient skill (typically a cleric of 12th level or higher). However, the window of time in which such mystical treatments function is short— healers have but 3 days after a victim's exposure to the curse to use their restorative magic before it is no longer sufficient….

After the 3-day window has passed, a victim's only chance of a cure through magic is a Remove Curse spell, cast by a cleric of 12th level or higher, during the time of the victim's transformation.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Sounds like bad writing. In the face of apparently contradictory RAW, I suggest taking everything as literally as possible and ignoring apparent contradictions.

Lycanthropy is always referred to as a curse, even in the quoted text. It is a curse. Repeat after me: lycanthropy is a curse.

Lycanthropy can be removed within three days of contracting it by application of Remove Disease or Heal. Lycanthropy is a curse, a very special curse, which happens to also be healable by Remove Disease or Heal. It is still very much a curse.

Therefore, Lycanthropy is a curse and affects an antipaladin normally. Within three days of contracting the curse, the antipaladin can be cured by application of Remove Disease or Heal. After that, removing the curse requires application of Remove Curse.

The special choice of Remove Disease / Heal are only done for thematic reasons, and in no way have anything to do with Lycanthropy being in any way equivalent to a disease. It's a curse. It's a curse with a couple of special rules tacked on. Nowhere is it suggested that lycanthropy is a disease for the first three days; in fact, it explicitly calls it out as still being a curse then, just one that can be removed by other means.

It's a curse. Your antipaladin can be a werewolf all he wants, but doesn't get any special benefit from doing so, as antipaladins have no special rules for interacting with curses (unless there's another antipaladin ability which says otherwise).


I agree that it is a curse. It also seems to be a disease.

THis thread is the only one I've found on the subject and it seems to agree.


The way i look at it is that it is a curse, it can be cast as a curse on someone. But it also can be spread as a disease (bite and scratches), in the case of the antipaladin being hurt by a werewolf, he wouldnt get the curse, because he is immune to the disease that spreads it.
But if he happened to get cursed (spells or similar effects), or was born from lycanthropes, he would be affected by it.

Rules wise:
On the first 3 days, including the initial contact, it is a disease.
After the first 3 days, it becomes the curse.


shadowkras wrote:

Rules wise:

On the first 3 days, including the initial contact, it is a disease.
After the first 3 days, it becomes the curse.

I'm afraid not. I do like the fluff that the disease spreads the curse, transforming the infected semi-permanently. But ruleswise, it is not a disease for any purpose other than being removable by CL 12 heal or remove disease in the first three days. Anti-Paladins are not immune, and Paladins are not immune either.


@Majuba
You are right, by RAW its a curse and thats it.

I should have made it clearer though, that was the way i would handle the situation, not RAW.
I like the fluff that it is a magical disease, and i believe thats how it has been portraited on many legends, although im not sure if it was a curse+disease or just a curse in 3.5.


There is at least one natural werewolf with three or more levels of antipaladin in a Paizo adventure path.


Doomed Hero wrote:
aegrisomnia wrote:
Doomed Hero wrote:

For the first three days after being afflicted, Remove Disease or Heal will cure a lycanthrope. After that, Remove Curse works.

This is from the SRD entry, describing it as both in the same sentence.

Quote:
Lycanthropy is a curse, and while some unscrupulous types may seek this “gift of the moon,” voluntary contraction of the disease is rare.
Where does it say that Remove Disease / Heal works on Werewolf Lycanthropy in the first three days?
SRD, bestiary entry on lycanthropes wrote:


Spells like Remove Disease and Heal are definitive and safer ways to break the curse, as long as they are cast by a holy person of sufficient skill (typically a cleric of 12th level or higher). However, the window of time in which such mystical treatments function is short— healers have but 3 days after a victim's exposure to the curse to use their restorative magic before it is no longer sufficient….

After the 3-day window has passed, a victim's only chance of a cure through magic is a Remove Curse spell, cast by a cleric of 12th level or higher, during the time of the victim's transformation.

its a curse that act like a disease, but its a curse nonetheless.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Maps, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

It is basically a matter of the way you want to run this lycanthopic antipaladin NPC. If you want him to have the benefits of lycanthropy but none of the drawbacks, you can make him a hereditary lycanthrope. If you want to rein him in a bit, make him cursed/diseased.


christos gurd wrote:
Doomed Hero wrote:
aegrisomnia wrote:
Doomed Hero wrote:

For the first three days after being afflicted, Remove Disease or Heal will cure a lycanthrope. After that, Remove Curse works.

This is from the SRD entry, describing it as both in the same sentence.

Quote:
Lycanthropy is a curse, and while some unscrupulous types may seek this “gift of the moon,” voluntary contraction of the disease is rare.
Where does it say that Remove Disease / Heal works on Werewolf Lycanthropy in the first three days?
SRD, bestiary entry on lycanthropes wrote:


Spells like Remove Disease and Heal are definitive and safer ways to break the curse, as long as they are cast by a holy person of sufficient skill (typically a cleric of 12th level or higher). However, the window of time in which such mystical treatments function is short— healers have but 3 days after a victim's exposure to the curse to use their restorative magic before it is no longer sufficient….

After the 3-day window has passed, a victim's only chance of a cure through magic is a Remove Curse spell, cast by a cleric of 12th level or higher, during the time of the victim's transformation.

its a curse that act like a disease, but its a curse nonetheless.

Yep, I think that's what we keep coming back to: it's a curse. A curse that can be removed using Remove Disease or Heal during the first three days - a special, unique curse - but a curse nonetheless.


I think there wasn't a lot of standardization on what was a curse vs what was a disease. For instance mummy rot is specifically called a magical disease in several places, but is clearly listed as a curse in its own entry.


Paizo dropped some verbage that was in 3.5. My thought is it is a Magical Disease.

3.5 Players Handbook wrote:


Divine Health (Ex): At 3rd level, a paladin gains immunity to all diseases, including supernatural and magical diseases (such as mummy rot and lycanthropy).

So in 3.5 it was a magicalor supernatural disease and paladins were immune.

Pathfinder Core wrote:


Divine Health (Ex): At 3rd level, a paladin is immune to all diseases, including supernatural and magical diseases.

In pathfinder they dropped the examples yet paladins still remain their immunity to supernatural diseases.

The antipaladin has different wording...

Advanced Players Guide wrote:


At 3rd level, the powers of darkness make an antipaladin a beacon of corruption and disease. An antipaladin does not take any damage or take any penalty from diseases. He can still contract diseases and spread them to others, but he is otherwise immune to their effects.

This does NOT mention supernatural diseases so my reading is that while a Paladin is immune to Lycanthropy, it would effect an Antipaladin fully.

Silver Crusade

I'd say go with having him be a natural werewolf (or were-whatver, though avoid bear since they're often lawful good).

As a side note, I was able to build a LG natural Werebear pally quite easily. Why not a CE werewolf pally?


Quote:
There is at least one natural werewolf with three or more levels of antipaladin in a Paizo adventure path.

If they were born a lycanthrope, there was no infection and the curse works at full effect, it cant even be cured.

Thus they could even become paladins, as long as the curse doesnt drive them evil (like it does in ravenloft).

Quote:
I think there wasn't a lot of standardization on what was a curse vs what was a disease. For instance mummy rot is specifically called a magical disease in several places, but is clearly listed as a curse in its own entry.

Mummy rot is specifically listed as "curse and disease".


shadowkras wrote:
Quote:
There is at least one natural werewolf with three or more levels of antipaladin in a Paizo adventure path.
If they were born a lycanthrope, there was no infection and the curse works at full effect, it cant even be cured.

Spoiler:
The AP is Carrion Crown. The NPC is kind of a special case who became an afflicted werewolf, then became an antipaladin of Jezelda (the demon patron of lycanthropes), then was blessed with natural lycanthropy by divine intervention. So kind of a red herring for deciphering the rules. Still interesting though.
Silver Crusade

Keep Calm and Carrion wrote:
shadowkras wrote:
Quote:
There is at least one natural werewolf with three or more levels of antipaladin in a Paizo adventure path.
If they were born a lycanthrope, there was no infection and the curse works at full effect, it cant even be cured.
** spoiler omitted **

Spoiler:
Wouldn't that be more along the lines of they used the demonic obedience feat, and gained it...

In fact I think the obeidence feat GIVES you Lycanthropy if you don't have it, and if you do, upgrades it to natural. If you're already naturally a lycnathrohrope, you become a stronger lycan


When I originally thought of this, I had the idea that it might be something gods of evil could use to entice afflicted lycanthropes.

Something along the lines of "you're a monster now anyway, if you just embrace it and serve me, i'll make all of the troublesome things about what you've become go away. All I ask is your devotion."

It seemed like a fantastic story idea, and a way to make an NPC villain more of a challenge.

I agree that it's a Curse. It seems that the consensus is that even though it also behaves like a disease it isn't actually one. (this bothers me, but them's the rules)

On the up side, Paladins are vulnerable to lycanthropy. I don't think that's ever been the case in any other edition of the game, so it never occurred to me before now. That would definitely be an interesting story idea and probably surprise the hell out of the Paladin PC in my group.


Mystic_Snowfang wrote:
As a side note, I was able to build a LG natural Werebear pally quite easily. Why not a CE werewolf pally?

Because of that Chaotic Evil part.

If you could make the werewolf good first, then knock yourself out. Definitely a cool idea, just hard to pull off.

Maybe a Wish cast by someone else, or a Helm of Opposite Alignment?


Quote:
Because of that Chaotic Evil part.

He probably meant anti-paladin.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / Antipaladins and Lycanthropy All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.