Sex changes


Rules Questions

101 to 118 of 118 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Deadmanwalking wrote:
Thelemic_Noun wrote:
I think Paizo made a mistake when they said that pregnant characters can't use the elixir, because that opens up the incredibly divisive question of when pregnancy begins, and in a fantasy context where souls exist, that question is a lot harder to answer scientifically. Mature game groups will be able to steer around this issue but it would probably be better to solve the core problem.

Uh...'pregnant' is a medical term. It has nothing to do with when there's a soul or a human life involved (which is the subject of the debate you refer to). It's purely a matter of conception having happened.

This paragraph and all that follows thus make no sense.

Pregnancy means that implantation has happened. If a fertilized egg fails to implant and is flushed out of the body, there was never a pregnancy.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
thaX wrote:

I keep thinking that getting another girdle was ruled out as a means to return to one's original gender.

Mainly for reasons of practicality. The girdle is a cursed item, you can't acquire or make one intentionally.

Liberty's Edge

Kittyburger wrote:
Deadmanwalking wrote:
Thelemic_Noun wrote:
I think Paizo made a mistake when they said that pregnant characters can't use the elixir, because that opens up the incredibly divisive question of when pregnancy begins, and in a fantasy context where souls exist, that question is a lot harder to answer scientifically. Mature game groups will be able to steer around this issue but it would probably be better to solve the core problem.

Uh...'pregnant' is a medical term. It has nothing to do with when there's a soul or a human life involved (which is the subject of the debate you refer to). It's purely a matter of conception having happened.

This paragraph and all that follows thus make no sense.

Pregnancy means that implantation has happened. If a fertilized egg fails to implant and is flushed out of the body, there was never a pregnancy.

Okay, you're right...the point still stands that it's a purely medical definition having nothing to do with abortion arguments, though.

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

Well, you see, when Mommie and Da-Da really love each other, they perform the Stork Calling Ritual. Then Mommie gets really big... I mean huge, out there. She waddles instead of walks, sits down out of breath all the time, and complains about the heat in the dead of winter...


Deadmanwalking wrote:
Kittyburger wrote:
Deadmanwalking wrote:
Thelemic_Noun wrote:
I think Paizo made a mistake when they said that pregnant characters can't use the elixir, because that opens up the incredibly divisive question of when pregnancy begins, and in a fantasy context where souls exist, that question is a lot harder to answer scientifically. Mature game groups will be able to steer around this issue but it would probably be better to solve the core problem.

Uh...'pregnant' is a medical term. It has nothing to do with when there's a soul or a human life involved (which is the subject of the debate you refer to). It's purely a matter of conception having happened.

This paragraph and all that follows thus make no sense.

Pregnancy means that implantation has happened. If a fertilized egg fails to implant and is flushed out of the body, there was never a pregnancy.
Okay, you're right...the point still stands that it's a purely medical definition having nothing to do with abortion arguments, though.

Pathfinder Chronicles, Gods and Magic, the entry on Pharasma on page 30, second paragraph:

"... Those who die before or during birth are wasted potential, destroying a worthy soul's opportunity to fulfill its destiny (and thus while she has no opinion on contraception, she opposes the killing of the unborn)..."

Looks to be that Pharasma, the goddess of birth, death, fate and prophecy views the death of an unborn as the death of a creature with a soul and fate. And seeing as birth and death and fate *are* her spheres of influence, the gods in Golarion are demonstrably real, and that they're unmitigated experts in their portfolio... abortion is killing something with a soul in Golarion.

Within the context of ye olde sex-change potion, I'm guessing the potion not allowing a change during pregnancy is to avoid mixing two explosives highly contentious debates at the game table that could involve alignment shifts/pissing off a neutral cleric's deity... Or they're trying to avoid the plot of "Junior".
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gqLH9CY4dws

Diekssus wrote:
Thelemic_Noun wrote:

I like the item, and I know how I'd like a character to use it. Otherwise, **shrug**

Just my own perspective.

I like the fact I can totally use it to wreck societies that have gender importance, I dislike people can use it on me without any form of save or consent. Although I suppose gender identity is not much of an issue in Golarion.

Added question:

If creatures like hags that normally only have one gender, can change still, Why don't they?

The same with the bee-people. They need to gather up males from others races, why would they, when a relatively cheap elixir would solve everything. same thing with hags.

Your first paragraph after the quote made me think of the Star-Bellied Sneetches.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VohyMXB4FLo


Westphalian_Musketeer wrote:
Deadmanwalking wrote:
Kittyburger wrote:
Deadmanwalking wrote:
Thelemic_Noun wrote:
I think Paizo made a mistake when they said that pregnant characters can't use the elixir, because that opens up the incredibly divisive question of when pregnancy begins, and in a fantasy context where souls exist, that question is a lot harder to answer scientifically. Mature game groups will be able to steer around this issue but it would probably be better to solve the core problem.

Uh...'pregnant' is a medical term. It has nothing to do with when there's a soul or a human life involved (which is the subject of the debate you refer to). It's purely a matter of conception having happened.

This paragraph and all that follows thus make no sense.

Pregnancy means that implantation has happened. If a fertilized egg fails to implant and is flushed out of the body, there was never a pregnancy.
Okay, you're right...the point still stands that it's a purely medical definition having nothing to do with abortion arguments, though.

Pathfinder Chronicles, Gods and Magic, the entry on Pharasma on page 30, second paragraph:

"... Those who die before or during birth are wasted potential, destroying a worthy soul's opportunity to fulfill its destiny (and thus while she has no opinion on contraception, she opposes the killing of the unborn)..."

Looks to be that Pharasma, the goddess of birth, death, fate and prophecy views the death of an unborn as the death of a creature with a soul and fate. And seeing as birth and death and fate *are* her spheres of influence, the gods in Golarion are demonstrably real, and that they're unmitigated experts in their portfolio... abortion is killing something with a soul in Golarion.

Which is really kind of disturbing when you think about the percentage of pregnancies that naturally end in early miscarriages.


James Jacobs wrote:
Thelemic_Noun wrote:
  • What happens if a Formian Queen drinks the elixir?
  • Up to the GM, but her stats would not change. Her role in formian society would change, though, in ways that are left to the GM to decide.

    Ant queens are always sort of pregnant, so the formian queen should be immune.

    This ruling should be in effect if your GM is sort of a biology nuts, again up to GMs to determine how close ant queen is the formian queen.

    My 2 cents,
    Yawar


    thejeff wrote:
    Westphalian_Musketeer wrote:
    Deadmanwalking wrote:
    Kittyburger wrote:
    Deadmanwalking wrote:
    Thelemic_Noun wrote:
    I think Paizo made a mistake when they said that pregnant characters can't use the elixir, because that opens up the incredibly divisive question of when pregnancy begins, and in a fantasy context where souls exist, that question is a lot harder to answer scientifically. Mature game groups will be able to steer around this issue but it would probably be better to solve the core problem.

    Uh...'pregnant' is a medical term. It has nothing to do with when there's a soul or a human life involved (which is the subject of the debate you refer to). It's purely a matter of conception having happened.

    This paragraph and all that follows thus make no sense.

    Pregnancy means that implantation has happened. If a fertilized egg fails to implant and is flushed out of the body, there was never a pregnancy.
    Okay, you're right...the point still stands that it's a purely medical definition having nothing to do with abortion arguments, though.

    Pathfinder Chronicles, Gods and Magic, the entry on Pharasma on page 30, second paragraph:

    "... Those who die before or during birth are wasted potential, destroying a worthy soul's opportunity to fulfill its destiny (and thus while she has no opinion on contraception, she opposes the killing of the unborn)..."

    Looks to be that Pharasma, the goddess of birth, death, fate and prophecy views the death of an unborn as the death of a creature with a soul and fate. And seeing as birth and death and fate *are* her spheres of influence, the gods in Golarion are demonstrably real, and that they're unmitigated experts in their portfolio... abortion is killing something with a soul in Golarion.

    Which is really kind of disturbing when you think about the percentage of pregnancies that naturally end in early miscarriages.

    Still it doesn't specify at what point during pregnacy, or before if you go by the medical definition, the soul begins.

    You could argue that there is a soul once the nervious systems is developed. But since by rules definition creatures without intelligence score of 3 or greater have no soul you could make an argument, based in RAW that babies younger that certain age are soulless creatures.

    Yawar,


    @ thejeff

    Golarion is regarded as a rather dark setting by many people when all its components are gathered together. All miscarriages being the unfortunate and premature end of a mortal soul worth the consideration of at least one deity seems to match up rather well. We are talking about a world where there is literally a nation of devil-worshippers that the rest of all the Inner Sea nations have tolerated the existence of for a long time. To say nothing of voluntary worshippers of Rovagug, vivisectionists surgically uplifting animals, expendable peasantry, and afflictions that can turn people evil (vampirism, lycanthropy, various curses/spells although these all have an element of GM fiat involved)

    @ Yawar

    Except we have the specific statement in one of the books that Pharasma views a death before or during birth as a waste of a soul's potential. You are giving a broad statement without citation: "... by rules definition creatures without intelligence score of 3 or greater have no soul..."

    I'd like to see your source.

    To say nothing of the trend in Paizo products that rules apply except wherein an exception is noted specifically. The exception takes precedence over the general. Even if there is the rule that creatures below 3 intelligence have no soul, this instance of Pharasma's views into the matter are an exception, and therefore override the general statement. Kinda like how the general trend is you can't take the same feat more than once, but there are exceptions.


    Westphalian_Musketeer wrote:

    @ thejeff

    Golarion is regarded as a rather dark setting by many people when all its components are gathered together. All miscarriages being the unfortunate and premature end of a mortal soul worth the consideration of at least one deity seems to match up rather well. We are talking about a world where there is literally a nation of devil-worshippers that the rest of all the Inner Sea nations have tolerated the existence of for a long time. To say nothing of voluntary worshippers of Rovagug, vivisectionists surgically uplifting animals, expendable peasantry, and afflictions that can turn people evil (vampirism, lycanthropy, various curses/spells although these all have an element of GM fiat involved)

    People doing horrible things, or even in a fantasy world, evil deities doing horrible things is to be expected. Something like 20%-30% of all souls not actually being born and thus being "wasted potential, destroying a worthy soul's opportunity to fulfill its destiny", seems a bit harsh as the natural way things work.

    Of course that's assuming real world estimates hold and you could blame it on some Golarion equivalent of Original Sin, perhaps Rovagug's influence on the world.

    It also seems a bit odd to consider such a common "death" as losing the ability to fulfill destiny. Seems a pretty weak destiny if it's that easy to thwart. Maybe dying before birth was destiny.

    Also that statement does not use the term pregnancy or define when the soul is present. It could be at conception. It could be at implantation. It could be at the more traditional quickening. Or even later.


    If you're trying to use the pathfinder orc bashing simulator to figure out population dynamics then the reason you can't reply to this is because you're trying to use a banana to type.

    Liberty's Edge

    Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

    ook... ook ook.... ook... OOK!!


    Westphalian_Musketeer wrote:

    @ Yawar

    Except we have the specific statement in one of the books that Pharasma views a death before or during birth as a waste of a soul's potential. You are giving a broad statement without citation: "... by rules definition creatures without intelligence score of 3 or greater have no soul..."

    I'd like to see your source.

    To say nothing of the trend in Paizo products that rules apply except wherein an exception is noted specifically. The exception takes precedence over the general. Even if there is the rule that creatures below 3 intelligence have no soul, this instance of Pharasma's views into the matter are an exception, and therefore override the general statement. Kinda like how the general trend is you can't take the same feat more than once, but there are exceptions.

    I was saying that that ruling,isn't valid for people's "biological aquisition of a soul"; thought it sets a presedent that soul are tied to sentinence.

    I beleive the ruling is in the bestiary.

    Yawar,


    Sorry, it was written in BoVD, I think. Its only implied in the RAW:

    "Intelligence determines how well your character learns and reasons. This ability is important for wizards because it affects their spellcasting ability in many ways. Creatures of animal-level instinct have Intelligence scores of 1 or 2. Any creature capable of understanding speech has a score of at least 3. A character with an Intelligence score of 0 is comatose. Some creatures do not possess an Intelligence score. Their modifier is +0 for any Intelligence-based skills or checks."

    Yawar,


    thejeff wrote:
    Westphalian_Musketeer wrote:

    @ thejeff

    Golarion is regarded as a rather dark setting by many people when all its components are gathered together. All miscarriages being the unfortunate and premature end of a mortal soul worth the consideration of at least one deity seems to match up rather well. We are talking about a world where there is literally a nation of devil-worshippers that the rest of all the Inner Sea nations have tolerated the existence of for a long time. To say nothing of voluntary worshippers of Rovagug, vivisectionists surgically uplifting animals, expendable peasantry, and afflictions that can turn people evil (vampirism, lycanthropy, various curses/spells although these all have an element of GM fiat involved)

    People doing horrible things, or even in a fantasy world, evil deities doing horrible things is to be expected. Something like 20%-30% of all souls not actually being born and thus being "wasted potential, destroying a worthy soul's opportunity to fulfill its destiny", seems a bit harsh as the natural way things work.

    Of course that's assuming real world estimates hold and you could blame it on some Golarion equivalent of Original Sin, perhaps Rovagug's influence on the world.

    It also seems a bit odd to consider such a common "death" as losing the ability to fulfill destiny. Seems a pretty weak destiny if it's that easy to thwart. Maybe dying before birth was destiny.

    Also that statement does not use the term pregnancy or define when the soul is present. It could be at conception. It could be at implantation. It could be at the more traditional quickening. Or even later.

    Maybe the fact that 20-30% of mortals don't "get out the door" so to speak is part of the reason some of the evil deities could care less about sapient mortal lives. It'd be very interesting if Lamashtu factored this into her twisted reasoning for some of her more... disturbing spawning sessions.

    "Oh, what do you care if I've used all the people of these village to give birth my children against their will? at least they're strong enough to make it into this world!"

    I think I'll just jot that down for my homebrew. Asmodeus and Lamashtu factor in heavily for the cause of some of the crap that goes down.

    YawarFiesta wrote:

    Sorry, it was written in BoVD, I think. Its only implied in the RAW:

    "Intelligence determines how well your character learns and reasons. This ability is important for wizards because it affects their spellcasting ability in many ways. Creatures of animal-level instinct have Intelligence scores of 1 or 2. Any creature capable of understanding speech has a score of at least 3. A character with an Intelligence score of 0 is comatose. Some creatures do not possess an Intelligence score. Their modifier is +0 for any Intelligence-based skills or checks."

    Yawar,

    Not a peep nor word on souls, so it doesn't precisely factor in for the purposes of this discussion without a lot of wiggling. To say nothing of what an intelligence-draining spell does to a soul.


    Deadmanwalking wrote:
    Diekssus wrote:

    Added question:

    If creatures like hags that normally only have one gender, can change still, Why don't they?

    The same with the bee-people. They need to gather up males from others races, why would they, when a relatively cheap elixir would solve everything. same thing with hags.

    Why spend a couple of thousand GP when you can have it for free?

    Plus, would you willingly swap gender permanently just for practical purposes?

    Well with the bee people, considering their society (it purpose related nature) , and the fact that keeping humans to breed with around for a multiple lifetimes is far from "free" I'd say every one of them would be willing to gender swap for the sake of the hive.

    And with hags, considering that you cannot trust your changeling children from actually going back, and it still requiring a magical ritual to complete it, all things that are hardly free. I'd call it rather naïve to simply say, why would they. it is in fact relatively cheap.


    Ipslore the Red wrote:
    Diekssus wrote:
    relatively cheap

    It costs, what, 2,500 gold? For perspective: One gold is a day's wages for the average human commoner, assuming Skill Focus (Profession), +2 Wis from floating bonus, and taking 10 on a weekly check for Profession. Let's equate that to a 9-5 minimum wage job today. 9 dollars per hour for 8 hours gives us 72 dollars a day. The conversion rate would then be 1 gp : 72 USD. The elixir would then cost 180,000 dollars in today's money.

    It's cheap for adventurers and national governments, both of whom are fantastically rich by normal standards and still can't afford to drink these like water. Let's say a 20th level PC has the feat to craft this half price and only has, say, 75% of his ~880k WBL tied up in gear. That leaves 220k gp free, enough to craft 176 elixirs. A demigod's wealth is barely enough to switch sexes every day for a bit more than half a year or maybe start a small nation's breeding program once.

    tl;dr: For the typical PC they're cheap if they're one-off, in the big picture they're too expensive for widespread usage without devoting everything to them.

    Frankly, Comparing the resources of a bee people hive to a commoner is ridiculous, not only that, they last an entire lifetime, compared to humans multiples, so it is in fact relatively cheap. I'd also question the idea that this is only for adventures when it comes to price-range. If jade regent taught us anything, that can't be the case.


    Deadmanwalking wrote:
    Diekssus wrote:
    I like the fact I can totally use it to wreck societies that have gender importance, I dislike people can use it on me without any form of save or consent.
    I dunno, that seems really unlikely to come up. Who spends over 2k gp just to mess with someone in a way that will only cost them that much to undo? Plus pissing them off, of course.

    Frankly Considering that adventurers seem to have more money available then most people have in a lifetime, I'm pretty sure you can outlast them. not only that, but in those societies, the problems would be immediate. That's not even counting the identity changing abilities. Since the elixir doesn't leave traces. You could sneak it into a kings drink, kill the changed king, and no-one could tell if it actually was him. The evil uses for this are amazing.

    101 to 118 of 118 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
    Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Sex changes All Messageboards

    Want to post a reply? Sign in.