I have a question related to another thread. Anyhow the person I conversed with stated profession (torture) was perfectly fine in pfs. However most everything I've seen on torture from game developers was torture is explicitly evil. I assumed this would out the profession skilll under the "evil" umbrella. However he pointed out that it wasn't banned from pfs play.
Anyhow I'm of the opinion any dm observing a torture dayjob. Could flag a pc as evil... although I have never had a dm pay attention to the nature of my dayjob roll:p but that is a seperate issue.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Im the player with the Profession (torturer). Please dont turn this thread into a debate on the merits or lack thereof of torture. The sole point of inquiry of this thread is whether this profession is or should be banned from PFS play. As I indicated in another thread, the skill is allowable under current PFS rules. Thus, if a GM were to declare a character with it as evil and thereby removed from PFS play then a player would be punished for having merely selected a viable skill.
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
It's a dayjob. It's off-screen. You don't need to describe it, you just need to roll it. Sometimes I don't even ask what a PC is doing, they just roll and give me the number for their Chronicle at the end. Considering the things the campaign allows PCs to do, I personally couldn't care less about an "evil" day job. It's just another tired-out "Let's define what is evil" argument waiting to happen. People, let this one go.
|
RPG Superstar 2014 Top 16, RPG Superstar 2013 Top 16
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Thus, if a GM were to declare a character with it as evil and thereby removed from PFS play then a player would be punished for having merely selected a viable skill.
Just because a skill or other choice is "legal" or "viable" doesn't mean it isn't also an alignment infraction. Torturing an NPC for information (or any other reason) is also a perfectly legal and viable player choice, but it's still an evil act that will shift your alignment. The same applies to your day job.
Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Sure. It's legal. But it's probably a poor use of skill points.
At most you are earning 300 gp, and atonement costs 1000 gp.
If you are at my table, torturing people for money, you are going to be getting an alignment infraction. This isn't about in the heat of the moment, lives are at stake, and you go a little too far, this is you are going to work each morning to be paid to hurt people. In a world where there are many, many, many non pain based ways to get the information you need from people.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If you want to get technical RAW there is only a list of 31 or so professions. It certainly says these are the most common professions, and therefore its implied there are others.
I've never seen a GM say no to some other profession, and wouldn't expect them to. However, the precedent in PFS, is that lists are exhaustive (see animal companion lists for ranger and mounts for paladins and cavaliers, and tricks for animals.) As such, RAW says that for PFS, says that the list of 31 most common professions is exhaustive.
So my suggestion is if you want to use RAW as the basis of your argument, that you pick one of those 31. Otherwise, my suggestion would be to pick a profession that isn't evil.
Another suggestion is to change it subtlely to Interrogator, and then the problem goes away.
Venture-Lieutenant, South Dakota—Rapid City
|
This is one of those things that unfortunately is begging for table variations/alignment infraction discussion. While yes, it's legal, the choice will more than likely get to a point where you come across the GM who does have a problem with it. Other than flavor, why open yourself up to that?
If it's just a day job check for you, then change it to something else. There are plenty of other ways to make your Day Job flavorful and still provide you with a bit of extra gold :)
EDIT: Ninja'ed by Andrew and I like his suggestion for the replacement.
Followup: Occasionally, Profession choices do come up in scenarios. Profession (sailor) crops up more than you'd expect, and I can think of 3 times where Profession (librarian) can come in handy!
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Oh, are we flagging Profession Torturer as an evil act now?
Does this mean Underground Business vanity from the PFS Primer also flags you as Chaotic (and possibly Evil)? What about the Thieve's Guild vanity? Or the Assassin's Guild?
A day job is an abstracted roll of a character's offscreen activities and adds flavor to the RP of the character. Let's not start trying to regulate and penalize players for Day Job choices as that's wholly unnecessary.
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
We had this argument last year with profession (assassin). I think this is even more clean-cut.
My visceral disgust with this was born from a character-building session I had with a new player during the Season 1 roll-out of the PFS rules. He wanted a day job that would have not only been an evil act, it would have gotten him booted from my table. I told him no, PFS doesn't condone that sort of nonsense, and he chose a different, innocuous skill.
|
|
The selection of the profession made sense from my character background perspective (was going for a kind of Salem witch trial Puritan vibe). Basically, the character was from a region that used torture to punish those with magic. Being a sorcerer herself, she uses this profession to allow herself to hide within sight of those that oppress magic uses.
I was going for flavor and was not making a moral determination of whether torture is immoral or evil or whether it yields verifiable results.
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Not enough people use the tekko-kagi (iron claw). It's a super-cool weapon, with lots of flavor potential and uniqueness. Definitely a welcome change of pace from Yet Another Greatsword, right? Plus it's totally legal. And as a weapon, the whole point of it is to hurt people.
So when I walk up to the nearest random NPC and use that tekko-kagi to eviscerate him without provocation, any GM who calls it an alignment infraction is simultaneously penalizing me for selecting a legal character option and trying to regulate and penalize the ways I add flavor to the RP of my character.
|
|
Oh, are we flagging Profession Torturer as an evil act now?
Does this mean Underground Business vanity from the PFS Primer also flags you as Chaotic (and possibly Evil)? What about the Thieve's Guild vanity? Or the Assassin's Guild?
A day job is an abstracted roll of a character's offscreen activities and adds flavor to the RP of the character. Let's not start trying to regulate and penalize players for Day Job choices as that's wholly unnecessary.
All those other things you list are not evil. Just illegal in most cities in Golarion. PFS doesn't disallow illegal things, just evil ones.
|
Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento
|
Oh, are we flagging Profession Torturer as an evil act now?
No. *having* profession Torturer is not an evil act. (You could be retired, after all.) *using* profession torturer on the other hand is.
Does this mean Underground Business vanity from the PFS Primer also flags you as Chaotic (and possibly Evil)? What about the Thieve's Guild vanity? Or the Assassin's Guild?
Once again, having it? no. Using it yes. And if a cleric of Abadar (or some other lawful diety) was using one or both on day job checks, he would probably need an atonement as well. But being chaotic isn't grounds for being removed from society play. (On the other hand, if you can find me a Golarian city where the thieve guild is sanction by law, ala Terry Pratchet's Aukh-Morpork, you might be able to make a case.)
(I don't actually remember what the assassins guild vanity does. I seem to remember it did not give you access to the guild, just friends in it, but that may be incorrect?)
|
|
Not enough people use the tekko-kagi (iron claw). It's a super-cool weapon, with lots of flavor potential and uniqueness. Definitely a welcome change of pace from Yet Another Greatsword, right? Plus it's totally legal. And as a weapon, the whole point of it is to hurt people.
So when I walk up to the nearest random NPC and use that tekko-kagi to eviscerate him without provocation, any GM who calls it an alignment infraction is simultaneously penalizing me for selecting a legal character option and trying to regulate and penalize the ways I add flavor to the RP of my character.
One of those is in-game, at-the-table character behavior and subject to adjudication.
The dayjob is a flavor abstraction.
Because if we're going to start hawking day jobs for alignment violations, we've just opened an unfun, unwieldy and wholly subject to individual GM interpretation bureaucratic process to day jobs.
Unless PFS management comes out and bans/clarifies certain vanities, we as GMs have bigger issues to deal with on a regular basis than someone's choice of day job.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The selection of the profession made sense from my character background perspective (was going for a kind of Salem witch trial Puritan vibe). Basically, the character was from a region that used torture to punish those with magic. Being a sorcerer herself, she uses this profession to allow herself to hide within sight of those that oppress magic uses.
I was going for flavor and was not making a moral determination of whether torture is immoral or evil or whether it yields verifiable results.
Based on your background, interrogator or inquisitor both seem to fit, and it won't be squicky.
|
Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento
|
It's hard for me to really judge, as there are plenty of evil PCs in the Society, all with "CN" written on their character sheets. As long as those PCs are legal, I don't see what difference this makes. PFS condones PCs getting away with whatever as long as they have "CN" on their sheet.
Not really. And if you see people doing this, call the GM on it. And if the GM won't do anything, elevate it.
"People aren't following the rules, so we should just get rid of them" is a very bad argument. (edited to remove profanity.)
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I agree this is one of those crazy threads that will eventually end in it being locked and people getting upset because one side offends the other.
So lets just leave it at this:
The skill is Profession(XXXXXX). I couldn't care less what the (xxxxxx) is, just tell me the roll if it is for a Day Job. That happens "off screen" and I can not adjudicate what your character does between sessions.
That being said, I have had characters want a circumstance bonus because they have a certain profession. I.E. a Profession (Florist) might get a circumstance bonus to help with a Knowledge(Nature) roll to identify a type of flower. At that point it becomes an issue if you have something questionable as your profession, and I might not allow you to use it.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Take this or leave it, But Mike actually had some input on this...
Torture is evil.
Few lines down from that post
We can list all kinds of situations. That isn't what this topic is about. If you want to discuss blood boiling, bathing in acid, setting on fire or many other acts, start your own thread instead of derailing this one.
Let me simplify. Torture is evil. I'm not arguing about it, I'm not debating it.
Torture is evil, plain and simple.
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Unless PFS management comes out and bans/clarifies certain vanities, we as GMs have bigger issues to deal with on a regular basis than someone's choice of day job.
Be aware that PFS managesment HAS come out and declared that torture (for any reason) is an evil act. Using Profession (torture) involves torturing people.
What is unclear? What further ruling needs to be made?
|
Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento
|
The selection of the profession made sense from my character background perspective (was going for a kind of Salem witch trial Puritan vibe). Basically, the character was from a region that used torture to punish those with magic. Being a sorcerer herself, she uses this profession to allow herself to hide within sight of those that oppress magic uses.
I was going for flavor and was not making a moral determination of whether torture is immoral or evil or whether it yields verifiable results.
I'm not really understanding how Profession (Torturer) lets you hide from torturers and make money unless you are saying that she hides from suspicion by being the one who tortures the other witches, in which case I would say the act is both evil *and* hypocritical and self serving. (which only makes it more evil, not less.)
|
|
Not enough people use the tekko-kagi (iron claw). It's a super-cool weapon, with lots of flavor potential and uniqueness. Definitely a welcome change of pace from Yet Another Greatsword, right? Plus it's totally legal. And as a weapon, the whole point of it is to hurt people.
So when I walk up to the nearest random NPC and use that tekko-kagi to eviscerate him without provocation, any GM who calls it an alignment infraction is simultaneously penalizing me for selecting a legal character option and trying to regulate and penalize the ways I add flavor to the RP of my character.
Reductio ad absurdum
|
Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Because shifting to good is between them and their conscience. Shifting to evil means removing them from the game.
If you are at my table, and previously you did something that got you noted as moving toward evil, and you do something good, point it out to me and I will annotate the chronicle.
If you are a cleric of a evil deity, and you are running around being a nice guy, I am probably going to eventually ask you for an atonement. If you have some other feature that requires you to be neutral on some axis, and I am aware of it, I will probably try to keep track.
|
All those other things you list are not evil. Just illegal in most cities in Golarion. PFS doesn't disallow illegal things, just evil ones.Oh, are we flagging Profession Torturer as an evil act now?
Does this mean Underground Business vanity from the PFS Primer also flags you as Chaotic (and possibly Evil)? What about the Thieve's Guild vanity? Or the Assassin's Guild?
A day job is an abstracted roll of a character's offscreen activities and adds flavor to the RP of the character. Let's not start trying to regulate and penalize players for Day Job choices as that's wholly unnecessary.
I would bed to differ. Assassination as an act isn't evil? Seriously? Those vanities are or at least can be evil, but they merely lack an "evil descriptor tag."
Should they be changed to have that tag? No. Should the player who has a professional torturer PC get an alignment infraction? Heck no. What happens off stage does not matter in the context of organized play. Only their actions during the scenario.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Jiggy, nothing but mad respect for you as a person (just so you don't think I'm frothing at the mouth and yelling at you ;).
Ultimately, for me, this boils down:
Is the act of rolling for a Day Job for Profession: Torturer or Assassins' Guild (if you are an active 'off-screen' assassin) considered an in-game evil act subject to alignment infractions?
Is the act of rolling for a Day Job for Underground Business, Front (Sczarni), or Thieves' Guild an in-game chaotic act subject to alignment infractions?
Otherwise, I'm with Mike Clarke above.
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Is the act of rolling for a Day Job for Profession: Torturer or Assassins' Guild (if you are an active 'off-screen' assassin) considered an in-game evil act subject to alignment infractions?
(Emphasis mine.)
Looking at where Mike Brock said torture is evil, I don't see him specifying "only if it's done during a scenario". He just said "torture is evil, plain and simple".
So unless we start putting words in his mouth, then the only question is "did the PC torture someone?"
If yes, then that's an evil act. Period.
|
Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento
|
Assassins’ Guild (4 PP): A practical Pathf inder
recognizes the benefit of being on good terms with the
local assassins’ guild. While not necessarily an active
assassin, you belong to an established assassins’ guild,
and gain a +4 circumstance bonus on any single Bluff,
Diplomacy, Intimidate, or Sense Motive check when
dealing with other assassins of any guild, usable once per
game session.
That vanity doesn't make you an assassin. And having the skills of an assassin doesn't mean you use them to assassinate people. (Technically, a police sniper at a hostage situation could be said to be assassinating the hostage takers, in that he is killing people who are unaware of his presence.)
*using* the Profession (Torturer) for a day job *is* an evil act.
*using* profession (Assassin) for a day job check is almost certainly an evil act.
saying "well I used to be a guild assassin and my membership card is still valid" is not an evil act.
|
Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
And now I have a concept for a lawful thieve guild vanity....
"Sometimes people, often wealthy people come to the church of Abadar because they need money, and they need that money in secret. And when this happens we record the loan, and we swear never to speak of it. Sometimes they don't want to pay us back. But we are true to our oath. When this happens, the church does not go to the law, they come to me. I read the book of secret loans, and I balance the scales."
Inquisitor (thief) of Abadar.
|
Assassination is no more evil than going on a mission to kill a particular NPC that the Decemvirate wants dead.
I can't dispute this myself. In WWII, we figured out which specific plane that Yamamoto was going to be on and sent P-38s to shoot it down. Are those pilots assassins? Likewise, as Pathfinders, we murder, yes MURDER, dozens of sentients for the good of the Decemvirate. And ourselves. So yeah...
|
|
So if the local VC allows this in their area, and then the player goes on the road with this PC, do you make them retire it at your table? Not allow them to play? Not allow them a day job roll? As a convention GM, is it your place to overrule a regional VC about this?
As I understand it, GMs are not to be booting legal builds from their table. Does VC fiat make this a legal build?
|
|
+1 David.
Please reference my initial post on this thread. I'm not interested in a debate on whether torture is evil or whether it can serve a beneficial role. My interest is purely whether it is an act, in the context of a day job check, that could be declared an "evil act" by the GM that results in the removal of my character from PFS play.
|
|
So if the local VC allows this in their area, and then the player goes on the road with this PC, do you make them retire it at your table? Not allow them to play? Not allow them a day job roll? As a convention GM, is it your place to overrule a regional VC about this?
As I understand it, GMs are not to be booting legal builds from their table. Does VC fiat make this a legal build?
I'd refer to "Alignment Infractions" on pp. 33-34 of the Guide to Organized Play. There is a process to go through before a character is deemed "wantonly evil" and removed from play. As for in the moment:
Ultimately, the GM is the final authority at the table, but she must warn any player whose character is deviating from his chosen alignment. This warning must be clear, and the GM must make sure that the player understands the warning and the actions that initiated the warning. The PC should be given the opportunity to correct the behavior, justify it, or face the consequences.
Let's take for granted that it's evil to torture people for money (because, you know, come on).
If a player indicates that he would like to torture for his dayjob, give him a warning that that's an evil action and will shift his alignment appropriately and allow him to make the choice. If he chooses to roll for the dayjob, give him the gold and note an alignment shift. (Note to David and Duncan: the character is *not* immediately removed from play by the ruling of a single GM and without further process. The single GM can rule the single alignment shift.)
If the character continues to make money by torturing people in the future, I'd say that's a good candidate for being deemed "wantonly evil" and removed from play.
[EDITED for formatting]
|
|
So it sounds like the best answers is that the GM can hang PC removal over someone's head. So they can force the day job roll to not happen it sounds like. On a GM by GM basis, since the bylaws overrule VC fiat rulings on the subject. The GM is final authority, not the VC.
It does not seem like it is legal to toss this PC from the table, however, just for having profession: torturer. Just enforce GM fiat rulings on the day job roll as per the bylaws.
|
|
So if the local VC allows this in their area, and then the player goes on the road with this PC, do you make them retire it at your table? Not allow them to play? Not allow them a day job roll? As a convention GM, is it your place to overrule a regional VC about this?
As I understand it, GMs are not to be booting legal builds from their table. Does VC fiat make this a legal build?
The only two people, who by fiat, can override anyone else, all the time, is Mike Brock and John Compton.
As a GM, I can, within the rules as I understand them, make whatever ruling I feel is appropriate.
This isn't overruling anyone, because venture officers do not have the authority to approve something questionable outside their own table. Other GMs in a region will often look to their VOs for advice on these things, and so you often see table variation differing between entire regions.
Anyone riding a line like this should expect some level of table variation outside their local area.
Because rules obviously apply only to other people.
|
|
You could also just word it differently and take Profession (Interrogator). Would probably get a much less visceral reaction, and isn't necessarily something that would automatically be an evil act.
I would probably do this if I were dead set on this. Euphemisms work wonders for the military. They might work here too. We aren't murdering, we're "interdicting with extreme prejudice". You aren't a torturer, you're an "enhanced interrogator".
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
If I were the GM, I would hope that the dialogue would go something like:
GM: Duncan, does your character have a Day Job?
Player: Yes. He's a torturer. Profession (torture). Rolled a 23.
GM: Torture is, by definition an evil act, and I'd hate to move your Lawful Neutral character into LE territory. The atonement would cost more than you'd earn! Can you describe how you can earn money with that profession, without actually torturing people?
And then we would go to ...
Player: Sure. He uses his deep understanding of torture techniques to help victims recover.
GM: That seems awfully nice for a follower of Asmodeus.
Player: Some victims are willing to contract for services. This is a service I lawfully offer.
or
Player: I could, but really, that's what he does. The Paracount brings malcontents to us, and we torture them.
GM: Then if you want that 20 gp, I'll note the alignment shift. Do you want to pay for the atonement or retire the character?
Player: After consideration, can we say that no clients needed my ministrations since my last adventure?
GM: Absolutely.
Whatever the GM's attitude, I would expect that open, clear lines of communication would help the situation. Nobody wants to be surprised by the consequences of an action after it's too late to reconsider.