| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Personally I go with the philosophy that Paladins aren't supposed to put politeness above saving people/killing bad things, and would eat poor Johnny with some barbecue sauce if it was the only way to survive.
Upon praying to his god he'd probably get a response like "Unless you figure out how to sink your teeth into parables bro I say dig in, you've got a job to do. I didn't give you super mega Pally powers so you could sit around and starve to death while moping over Johnny's death here, go kill some Demons or something, aight?."
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Sometimes I wonder why people think of these things.
The dying druid says to her paladin friend, "You must eat me. It is my way, that the dead pass their strength to the living. I honour your strength, and I ask that you honour mine. Take me into you, that I may go with you in your noble cause."
|
I agree entirely with Ashiel. And Rynjin. And all the other people who are saying that cannibalism isn't Evil, though killing someone to eat is.
Now, people do make a point that many societies consider it a taboo...but that makes it Chaotic for people in those societies, not Evil. Going naked in public, or working on religious rest days, or a host of other behavior is also considered taboo (and even disgusting or evil) in many societies and those behaviors certainly aren't Evil. So a Paladin from such a society couldn't walk around eating everyone they found dead (or their Alignment would shift to NG or CG), but could certainly do so in an emergency.
And in some societies, where ritual cannibalism is the norm, it's even Lawful behavior, long hallowed by tradition, and a Paladin from such a society could eat the dead every day and twice on Sundays with no problem.
Now, eating the dead right in front of their relatives (who were going to bury them) when it's completely unnecessary, or other really unpleasant scenarios like that almost certainly is Evil...but that's a really niche case, and not what's being primarily talked about here.
This is strictly something you should bring up to your GM. There is no right or wrong answer here, necessarily.
In my game world eating sentient creatures, even if you didn't murder them to do so, is evil.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
This is strictly something you should bring up to your GM.
This is extremely true of everything regarding Paladin codes.
There is no right or wrong answer here, necessarily.
I disagree.
In my game world eating sentient creatures, even if you didn't murder them to do so, is evil.
Why? In what way does it hurt anyone or violate a single moral principle.
I disagree. It's Chaotic, not evil.
If you eat the corpse of someone against the wishes of their loved ones that is evil.
Purposely causing pain and trauma to a living sapient is evil period.
So then would the anyone who thinks that cannibalism is automatically evil does it change your mind if it is an established part of their culture and religious practices. Do you consider the Aghori evil in real life? What about Christians who eat the flesh of incorruptible saints? How about corpse honey in desert communities?
|
I find it hard to believe that a couple PCs managed to get trapped somewhere in such a harsh environment without being high enough of a level to have access to spells that make food and water....the paladin has create water. All you need is purify food if you have create food and a half-a$$ed survival check to scrounge up some animal/fish/crab/plant matter...
What level is the party and what are they? Also it takes weeks to starve to death...how long are they gonna be trapped? Usually you die of thirst in the wild in 4 or so days without sufficient water but your body can go for around 3-4 weeks without eating before you die.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think most "good" religions would agree that the preservation of life overrules the sanctity of the dead. In which case, as long as the paladin does not kill to cannabilize (which would not be preserving life), he would be free to save his own life by eating the flesh of others in an emergency situation.
The "good" choice being choosing to continue to live, rather than choosing to die. Many religions view life as a sacred blessing that to throw away by choice would be considered evil, and in fact worth a damnation to hell.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The dying druid says to her paladin friend, "You must eat me. It is my way, that the dead pass their strength to the living. I honour your strength, and I ask that you honour mine. Take me into you, that I may go with you in your noble cause."
It would be terrible if that druid later turned out to be a reincarnated druid, and he came back the next day asking why you didn't leave him any left overs.
Anyway, I want to bring up something- in America at least, disturbing grave and messing with bodies apparently was more on the lines of vandalism rather the rather serious crime of desecrating a grave we know of today. It wasn't until the Secret Service stopped a Counterfeiting organization's plot to kidnap Abraham Lincoln's body that this stuff began to become one of an assortment of felonies due to the more outrage.
The More You Know!
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I disagree. It's Chaotic, not evil.
If you eat the corpse of someone against the wishes of their loved ones that is evil.Purposely causing pain and trauma to a living sapient is evil period.
So then would the anyone who thinks that cannibalism is automatically evil does it change your mind if it is an established part of their culture and religious practices. Do you consider the Aghori evil in real life? What about Christians who eat the flesh of incorruptible saints? How about corpse honey in desert communities?
Pally-"So dude, we're trapped on this island and you are looking delicious...How's your momma gonna feel about me snackin' on your leg when you kick it?"
SnackPC-"I don't know, I told you it was cool with me because of the mission so she should be OK with it."Pally-"Sweet." A while later. "Dude you still with us? Dude? Time for some snackage..."
Meanwhile, somewhere near the Hall of Justice, SnackPC's Mom has an uneasy feeling...
Pally goes to create some water....no powers. "Crap, I guess mommasita isn't good with Snackmixalot becoming a meal. Guess I'll be dead in a few days with no water...."
My point is how the hell would a dude trapped on an island have any way of knowing how someone else would react that is possibly 100s of miles away? You don't fall from other peoples' perceptions of your actions, you fall because of your intent while taking actions that are evil or reckless and could hurt innocent people. You and your buddy on the island have the fate of the world at stake and your buddy is sacrificing his body so you can carry on the mission to save the world. If his momma doesn't accept his sacrifice and chooses to blame the Pally that wouldn't cause the Pally to fall.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Now I would agree that if the Pally came back to SnackPCs mom and said-
"Mam, your son sacrificed himself to help us complete our mission...what were you feeding him? He had the sweetest aftertaste! I am talking finger-lickin' d-e-l-i-c-i-o-u-s!"
That would make the Pally fall. He is cause undue trauma and distress to her at that point. Pally just saying that Snacky sacrificed himself to help propel the mission forward...not so bad.
Now I would agree that if the Pally came back to SnackPCs mom and said-
"Mam, your son sacrificed himself to help us complete our mission...what were you feeding him? He had the sweetest aftertaste! I am talking finger-lickin' d-e-l-i-c-i-o-u-s!"
That would make the Pally fall. He is cause undue trauma and distress to her at that point. Pally just saying that Snacky sacrificed himself to help propel the mission forward...not so bad.
That was actually the situation I was talking about, or if the family members were for some reason present. Yeah if you just don't tell them and don't cause anymore trauma then his death would normally cause no harm no foul. I mean other than a bunch of people starving to death.
eating tofu is Evil
Eat the mount!
Can you eat a class feature?
Though if the typical mounted paladin is anything like my grandfather, he'd resort to cannibalism before touching the horse.
On more serious note, the paladin would fast for as long as possible before resorting to cannibalism/anthropophagy. But unless the higher powers that watch over the paladin are complete jerks, they'll prefer a living paladin that tried to avoid a distasteful deed for as long as possible than a dead one.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
People are still grossly overcomplicating things which leads to alignment problems.
Remember: Evil = Hurting, Killing, Oppressing.
Eating a corpse, regardless of its source, is none of these things.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
A paladin wouldn't eat someone still living, or kill someone to survive, most likely (well, he could, but ...), and he'd try to keep the other people around him alive. If they've died despite his best efforts, though ... meat is meat, and if it helps him/others survive, it means their death was not in vain.
So.... Should my halfling witch tell the Pally that the delicious stew he just had was made from the corpses of the orcs he just killed?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So.... Should my halfling witch tell the Pally that the delicious stew he just had was made from the corpses of the orcs he just killed?
Depends. Is he Lawful Good or Lawful Stupid?
eating tofu is EvilNo, no, no, making other people eat tofu is Evil. Eating it yourself is just a bit odd. ;)
Eating unseasoned tofu is definitely odd.
Eating seasoned and stir-fried tofu is delicious! Especially the littlest bits that get knocked off, and then get extra crispy at the bottom of the wok. :)
Mmmm...
So.... Should my halfling witch tell the Pally that the delicious stew he just had was made from the corpses of the orcs he just killed?Depends. Is he Lawful Good or Lawful Stupid?
Actually, it might not matter, for several reasons.
Firstly, did she need to cook the orcs? If it is not an emergency situation, then that is completely unnecessary.
Secondly, did she have to lie, even by omission, about this? She knew that everyone would be disturbed by it, so it means that she caused harm through her lies (and again, there might be no greater good she is serving by doing this). And even if it was necessary.... is that something you can just force on someone?
Thirdly, did she use .the cook people hex? That falls under the 'eating people to gain power' thing I quoted earlier. It is generally evil, and the hex itself confirms that. Particularly since the hex's effect are based off of spells already on her list (except for all the buffs; but by that point, most of that would likely have been over taken by enhancement items anyway)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
guys
if I die first
you all can eat me
guys
if I die first
you all can eat me
Do you prefer being grilled, baked or roasted on a spit?
guys
if I die first
you all can eat me
Aww, you're so sweet Lamontius! *slurp, slurp*
Actually, it might not matter, for several reasons.
Firstly, did she need to cook the orcs? If it is not an emergency situation, then that is completely unnecessary.
It's also completely unnecessary that I eat anything other than the bare minimum nutrients to survive. I still eat nice food when I can and rarely dessert. Likewise, it's also unnecessary for a person from a culture that considers eating the dead to be respectful or a passing of power to cannibalize corpses. What's your point?
Secondly, did she have to lie, even by omission, about this? She knew that everyone would be disturbed by it, so it means that she caused harm through her lies (and again, there might be no greater good she is serving by doing this). And even if it was necessary.... is that something you can just force on someone?
Yeah. Lying about something like that is a dick move since you could squick them out. But I'd hardly call it harmful.
Thirdly, did she use the cook people hex? That falls under the 'eating people to gain power' thing I quoted earlier. It is generally evil, and the hex itself confirms that. Particularly since the hex's effect are based off of spells already on her list (except for all the buffs; but by that point, most of that would likely have been over taken by enhancement items anyway)
Could you explain how it's evil, please? Killing people to gain power, yes. Eating a nonsentient object, no way.
And yes, I read what you quoted. JJ didn't explain it either, he just said "it's evil because I said so".
Yeah, using the hex on a living creature (since it specifies alive or dead) would definitely be evil. That said, if they were dead already? Well it does say that the result is always delicious, and I've never had orc before.
Most cannabalism is not for 'crash in the mountains" survival and also leaving phychopaths out of the mix, Most of it was a cultural norm and developed on islands where protein was harder to come by ......
it was a cultural good and right thing to do .... honoring the ancestor by allowing them to sustain the future
A paladin can therefor very much cannabilise a corpse (great band!!!)...
Killing the person would be evil but eating their remains not really..........
This is obviously offensive to the ears of westerners who had ample protein rich game and different funerary rites but that doesn't make it evil...... why would eating a cow be any different? just protein rich souless meat......
Thirdly, did she use the cook people hex? That falls under the 'eating people to gain power' thing I quoted earlier. It is generally evil, and the hex itself confirms that. Particularly since the hex's effect are based off of spells already on her list (except for all the buffs; but by that point, most of that would likely have been over taken by enhancement items anyway)Could you explain how it's evil, please? Killing people to gain power, yes. Eating a nonsentient object, no way.
And yes, I read what you quoted. JJ didn't explain it either, he just said "it's evil because I said so".
More like 'it is evil since it highly encourages predatory behavior, and I have to ask why you spent you time figuring out how to do that'
I think I brought this up in other thread- The Murderhobo Paradox:
Do kill in order to get loot, or are you forced to kill and just happen to get loot from it?
The original thing JJ was talking about was the Blood Drinker feat, which has this line:
You have acquired a taste for the blood of creatures with this subtype.
That sound PRETTY evil. You hunted down and drank the blood of enough intelligent creatures that you have detailed preferences and have learned how to more effectively feed on them and gain power from it.
Similarly, the Cook People Hex is a high level hex that you need considerable training to learn. And heck, most of the spell effects it gives you can be cast by any low level wizard or cleric (the party should have at least one of those; witches are great debuffers for SoS wizards, at the very least)
Planning to get either of these effects means that you do things like this regularly enough that it is not just plain 'necessity'.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I didn't make any arguments about necessity.
The ability to use something in a predatory fashion doesn't necessitate using it that way. For example, death knell can be used in animal sacrifices to empower a spell cast later, or used to slay incapacitated enemies for a boost of power.
|
|
People at Paizo have stated that eating people to gain mystical power is Evil. So, officially, doing that is Evil. I can even see the logic, since doing so might tap into inherently Evil mystical forces.
Now personally, I'd be incline to say that eating people for power isn't Evil at all...but that's a House Rule, like my allowing Charisma instead of Wisdom for Will Saves at the player's option, and isn't relevant to a discussion about the official setting/rules.
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
People at Paizo have claimed that casting protection from evil or summoning celestial badgers a bunch of times will make you go to heaven (JJ treats casting an aligned spell as an act of that alignment)- without any rules citations, I'd add.
I'm not inclined to call those official rules. :P
More like 'it is evil since it highly encourages predatory behavior, and I have to ask why you spent you time figuring out how to do that'
Experience points encourage predatory behavior. As does treasure. As does the Survival skill. And so on, and so on.
It also encourages survivalist and scavenging, since it can be used on dead creatures too. Adventurers *cough*murderhobos*cough* tend to have a lot of those around even if they don't want to.
The original thing JJ was talking about was the Blood Drinker feat, which has this line:
That sound evil. You hunt down and drink the blood of intelligent enough creatures that you have detailed preferences and have learned how to more effectively feed on them and gain power from it.
Similarly, the Cook People Hex is a high level hex that you need considerable training to learn.
Citation? I'm pretty sure a witch can just hit that level and decide that she wants to get creative in the kitchen by applying the magic she's learned or intuitively acquired from her familiar/patron. Even then, you could get considerable practice without murder, it just means you need to find dead bodies that aren't in use (IE - graveyards or the countless orcs and demons who died in your defending the hapless peasants).
Planning to get either of these effects means that you do things like this regularly enough that it is not just plain 'necessity'.
Necessity has diddly to do with evil. If you are not HURTING, OPPRESSING, or KILLING somebody you are not doing evil. End of story.
I didn't make any arguments about necessity.
The ability to use something in a predatory fashion doesn't necessitate using it that way. For example, death knell can be used in animal sacrifices to empower a spell cast later, or used to slay incapacitated enemies for a boost of power.
And the guy caught in the border station with 50 kilos of Cocaine in his trunk of his car wasn't planning on selling them to the drug dealers.
There are only so many ways to use the Cook People hex. How could you make full use of that hex without ever the thought 'oh, a random encounter? Great, my buffs were about to run out' coming up. And encouraging that kind of mentality is generally 'evil'.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
People at Paizo have claimed that casting protection from evil or summoning celestial badgers a bunch of times will make you go to heaven (JJ treats casting an aligned spell as an act of that alignment)-
That's really not how that works. Not all Good or Evil acts are equal. Casting Protection From Evil is a Good act on par with being nice to your waiter and leaving a big tip. If being nice to all your waiters and tipping well, and nothing else, is enough to get you into Heaven...you were probably a pretty decent person to start with.
without any rules citations, I'd add.
I'm not inclined to call those official rules. :P
Eh, I'd argue that anything the majority of the Paizo staff say is how things work is how they work officially, since they're the ones that decide what the official rules are.
They're not, though. Plenty of the rules in Pathfinder weren't written by Paizo employees, and human beings make mistakes.
Edit: And if that's not how it works, then what point was JJ trying to make? If casting an aligned spell is such a minor thing, what's the point of trying to argue about it? If casting protection from evil isn't going to make you any more good, animate dead isn't going to make you any more evil. Without getting into some of the other strangeness that idea causes, like summoning and binding an angel with planar binding being a good act.
|
|
They're not, though. Plenty of the rules in Pathfinder weren't written by Paizo employees, and human beings make mistakes.
Sure...but what basis is there for those they print being more meaningfully official than those they mention.
Edit: And if that's not how it works, then what point was JJ trying to make? If casting an aligned spell is such a minor thing, what's the point of trying to argue about it? If casting protection from good isn't going to make you any more good, animate dead isn't going to make you any more evil. Without getting into some of the other strangeness that idea causes, like summoning and binding an angel with planar binding being a good act.
You misunderstand what I'm saying. Casting it is still an act of the appropriate sort, and so casting Protection From Good would make a Paladin fall (since it is an Evil act, even if an exceedingly minor one), and it varies by the spell how significant the Evil of the act is (Animate Dead is worse than Protection From Good). If your character uses an Evil spell extensively, and is already, say, Neutral, and doesn't actively perform good works to counter that, you're gonna be Evil pretty rapidly. So...meaningful, just not as crazy as the example people tend to use.
More like 'it is evil since it highly encourages predatory behavior, and I have to ask why you spent you time figuring out how to do that'Experience points encourage predatory behavior. As does treasure. As does the Survival skill. And so on, and so on.
It also encourages survivalist and scavenging, since it can be used on dead creatures too. Adventurers *cough*murderhobos*cough* tend to have a lot of those around even if they don't want to.
The original thing JJ was talking about was the Blood Drinker feat, which has this line:
That sound evil. You hunt down and drink the blood of intelligent enough creatures that you have detailed preferences and have learned how to more effectively feed on them and gain power from it.
Similarly, the Cook People Hex is a high level hex that you need considerable training to learn.
Citation? I'm pretty sure a witch can just hit that level and decide that she wants to get creative in the kitchen by applying the magic she's learned or intuitively acquired from her familiar/patron. Even then, you could get considerable practice without murder, it just means you need to find dead bodies that aren't in use (IE - graveyards or the countless orcs and demons who died in your defending the hapless peasants).
Planning to get either of these effects means that you do things like this regularly enough that it is not just plain 'necessity'.Necessity has diddly to do with evil. If you are not HURTING, OPPRESSING, or KILLING somebody you are not doing evil. End of story.
Necessity has a lot to do with it.
-If someone tries to lodge an axe in your head, you 'need' to stop them, possibly with deadly force, in order to survive. And that is...'neutral' really. Not evil at least.-You might 'need' to snipe a bandit with an axe attacking an innocent person, both because you want to stop that person from getting an axe in the head, and because you would rather not let the bandit think to put an your own head. That is 'good', since you prevented another person from getting killed.
-Just seeing a random person going down the road, and deciding to kill them with no provocation. That is not necessary, and it is 'evil.'
And yes Ashiel, I do recognize this problem with the experience and loot system (I keep on trying to make 'Murderhobo Paradox' a thing, I worry it is never going to be a thing). Still, I can safely say that within the system, you can generally avoid eating people. Campaigns might force you to be at odds with various violent opponents, requiring the use of deadly force, but that is still different from eating people. The game may require you to loot treasure, due to the fast scaling nature of a system that assumes you will do so, but you can generally avoid eating corpses (since food is laughably affordable)
Eating people is not an inherent part of the system, since it assumes more 'European wilderness' rather tan the isolated island where cannibalism was a necessity. It generally should rest as a very particular and situational occurrence, rather than your default modus operandi.
Imagine if the enemy knows about you and your methods. Don't you think the idea "I have to kill them, or they will tear the flesh from my bones and devour it" seem like 'oppressing' or 'harming'?
And yes, you might be right about how they GET the Cook People hex. Nothing says that a witch necessarily chooses her hexes, so they might be handed down from their Patrons (controlled, in this case, by the Player). Still... I would be worried if I was a LG witch and my patron suddenly tried to get me into the idea of eating people. At the very least, the graveyard situation you suggested sounded like theft and the destruction of a body for rather shaky benefits (again, wizards and clerics can cast most of those spells rather easily; do you need to eat a person to do this? And the effects last an hour. What are you planning to do in the next hour that justifies theft and destruction of a body?)
That's pretty ludicrously at odds with the Alignment chapter, which says that what you do defines your alignment. Not what flag you happen to be holding. I know JJ wasn't able to provide a citation as to why he thought it worked that way, but can you?
Note: I don't care about what offhanded comment a designer or writer made at some point, nor do I care for what's in the FAQ (though it would support my point- PFS doesn't consider Aligned spells to automatically be aligned acts). I'm looking for something in the rules or errata. I haven't found the line that makes people think the rules function this way, and people never show it to me. I'm questioning its existence.
|
|
That's pretty ludicrously at odds with the Alignment chapter, which says that what you do defines your alignment. Not what flag you happen to be holding. I know JJ wasn't able to provide a citation as to why he thought it worked that way, but can you?
How are spells not something you do?
And some kinds of magic being inherently good or (particularly) bad is a definite trope in most fiction, with the use of black magic being rather inherently a bad thing to do.
Note: I don't care about what offhanded comment a designer or writer made at some point, nor do I care for what's in the FAQ (though it would support my point- PFS doesn't consider Aligned spells to automatically be aligned acts). I'm looking for something in the rules or errata. I haven't found the line that makes people think the rules function this way, and people never show it to me. I'm questioning its existence.
It's a RAI thing as much as anything. Basically, if the Alignment descriptor spells don't mean the spell is an act of that alignment...what do those descriptors even mean?
Welcome to 'alignment is a totally useless clusterf***' thread #58398.
It's not bad if you fry it in bacon grease!eating tofu is EvilNo, no, no, making other people eat tofu is Evil. Eating it yourself is just a bit odd. ;)Eating unseasoned tofu is definitely odd.
Eating seasoned and stir-fried tofu is delicious!
In a world with intelligent, ambulatory plants like Golarion, I really don't think vegetarianism has anything to with morality; there are probably gnoll tribes that regard vegepygmies as a delicacy because they scream all the more shrilly. :P
Everything, living or not, is latently sentient and can be communicated with using the right methods (stone tell, etc.). Therefore, causing harm to any organism or material is evil.
The only non-evil character is a nudist elan that uses only repletion for sustenance.
Before I clicked the link, I thought you were referring to Kingdom of Loathing.
Or equip a Ring of Sustenance, I guess; this whole conversation could have been avoided if Create Food and Water was on the Pally spell list!