|
The problem with this is that it allows mechanical benefits for RPing evil, which can bring players into conflict with each other. I personally see no problem with RPing evil for no mechanical benefits in society (although if a paladin or other class with rigid morality is trying it, I will warn him and then give him an infraction). If done right it can be light and fun, the trick is not to take it seriously. But when you are attaching a bonus for carving up kids, people feel obligated to milk that bonus for what it is worth by torturing an orphanage. If this is being done just for fun, and somebody at the table is not cool with it, I tell the offending player that they must hold off on that behavior for now, as it is causing a problem. The problem arises when somebody with mechanical benefits for the deed sees it as his right to take those mechanical benefits, and insists on doing the act, even if somebody at the table objects. This turns into a potential argument, because you have to choose between disallowing somebody something he spent resources to get, or having another player offended. Obviously, this is not a good place to be.
IMHO, nothing good comes when you attach RP requirements to game mechanics. RP should be used to flavor mechanics, mechanics should be used to provide a backbone to RP. For this reason alone have I not built a paladin for year of the demon, and shall probably never build anything involving the evangelist class, despite how broken it looks.
|
The book wasn't written for PFS, and PFS usually doesn't make rules just to allow things in so much as allow things that are dandy for public to view in on. Don't suppose you have a nice suggestion for an obedience that's more public friendly Lamashtu? So long as your asking for one.
Conceive, carry to term and give birth to a horrible town-eating monster? No, that's not much better is it?
How about spend an hour every day feeding, nurturing, or training a dangerous and evil monstrosity, in preparation for the day that it will be loosed upon the world. That would be more like the Nanny of Monsters, though.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The book wasn't written for PFS, and PFS usually doesn't make rules just to allow things in so much as allow things that are dandy for public to view in on. Don't suppose you have a nice suggestion for an obedience that's more public friendly Lamashtu? So long as your asking for one.Conceive, carry to term and give birth to a horrible town-eating monster? No, that's not much better is it?
How about spend an hour every day feeding, nurturing, or training a dangerous and evil monstrosity, in preparation for the day that it will be loosed upon the world. That would be more like the Nanny of Monsters, though.
You deserve something if you can make the fort saves on those diapers...
|
My post isn't about Lamashtu, but my experience is somewhat tangential to this conversation.
My main character is a cleric of Arshea (an Empyreal Lord.) Now, I was pretty miffed that she can't have evangelists or exalted, etc. Someone pointed me to Chronicle of the Righteous. So, I go pick it up.
To get her boons, you have to experience sexual pleasure, either with yourself or with another. WHAT? I chose her because she was the gooddess of freedom. I didn't care for that obedience (to say nothing of the fact that, if I am at a table with younger players, it's not appropriate.)
So, what are my choices: 1) do nothing, play the character as I currently do, and not go for the prestige class that's in CotR; 2) accept the obedience and pick up the prestige class; 3) switch deities.
I am likely to go with option #3.
Now, Arshea is a good deity, but I find the obedience fairly inappropriate for public play (and I am completely aware that is a subjective view point.)
Paizo didn't screw my character, and I certainly didn't ask them for an exception so I can play the character I want to play. I have 3 viable choices before, though one of them is not acceptable to me.
Now, back to the present issue. Consider that the prohibition is against Lamashtu. What if, instead, the PFS campaign rule said, "no character may worship an evil deity." Well, there you go - that's a much bigger hammer, and they didn't use it. They narrowly tailored it to a particular item that, honestly, I don't feel belongs in a public play setting. Again, just my opinion.
|
Mark: I find that personally far less villainous than the Lamashtu Obedience. Far far less. Id go with what BigNorseWolf says above when this needs to be done in game.
You are right though it is completely inappropriate for public play. Which is why Id inform the GM of it perhaps prior to the game (if you know who the gm is gonna be) or slip them a note.
You bring up a very good sidepoint though Mark regarding the strangeness of some of the obediences. I guess in Arshea's case she is expousing Sexual Freedom ...
I guess in Arshea's case she is expousing Sexual Freedom ...
Its not really freedom if I don't have the choice about whether to do it or not. I think that has another word. Probably don't need extra details on that one.
If I remember right there are a few obediences that could be done off scene everyday as part of the one hour rituals in the morning without any mayham or murder or pulling attention to yourself.
|
|
I guess in Arshea's case she is expousing Sexual Freedom ...Its not really freedom if I don't have the choice about whether to do it or not. I think that has another word. Probably don't need extra details on that one.
Well, in her case, one can meet the requirements of the obedience without the participation or assistance of another.
Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento
|
Faiths of balance I think has less on him that the ISWG book. (Though it does give a trait for his followers.) The shattered star book has some nice flavor text admittedly, but it is pretty much the only source of info on Groetus. ISG pretty much just reprinted the ISWG, it looks like. It would have been nice if ISG had some new info, as well. I understand why, but it is a little disappointing.
But with the way they are doing boons / obediences, where each diety has it's own unique boons (Instead of just basing the dieties boons off their domains, like the warpriest does) and with 210 gods to write boons for, it means you pretty much can't play sentinel / evangalist / whatever the third one is for any but the most common gods, and probably won't be able to for a very long time.
|
|
Mark: I find that personally far less villainous than the Lamashtu Obedience. Far far less. Id go with what BigNorseWolf says above when this needs to be done in game.
You are right though it is completely inappropriate for public play. Which is why Id inform the GM of it perhaps prior to the game (if you know who the gm is gonna be) or slip them a note.
You bring up a very good sidepoint though Mark regarding the strangeness of some of the obediences. I guess in Arshea's case she is expousing Sexual Freedom ...
Assuming that the GM is not the younger member. IIRC, Thod's 11-year-old son, among others, GMs PFS games...
|
|
Kinevon: There is obviously an exception to anything I post :) So yes if your gm is a 11 year old male, then dont play that character.
Then again, if an 11 year old male is running your game then its likely they are going to have to have read the scenario already.. in which case its likely they will be expoused to characters like Miss Feathers and other such instances.