|
Sometime I actually want to run a game in a world where Raise Dead is common enough and acceptable enough for this to be a valid option. Brust's Drageara is something like that. It's common in certain circles to assassinate someone to send them a message.
So yeah, kill him to keep him under control while you investigate, then raise him if necessary. Why not?
Not in your standard PF world though.
If raise dead is common enough, assassins would have found common enough ways to keep people dead permanently (i.e. whatever check you need to make knowledge checks about divine spells, or spellcraft DC, would be 10, so common knowledge to know how to keep someone dead...) If something is common knowledge like this I don't even think you'd need a skill check... it's like living in a world overrun by vampires: everyone knows that you hang garlic on your doorstep and around windows, etc.
Contributor
|
If raise dead is common enough, assassins would have found common enough ways to keep people dead permanently (i.e. whatever check you need to make knowledge checks about divine spells, or spellcraft DC, would be 10, so common knowledge to know how to keep someone dead...) If something is common knowledge like this I don't even think you'd need a skill check... it's like living in a world overrun by vampires: everyone knows that you hang garlic on your doorstep and around windows, etc.Sometime I actually want to run a game in a world where Raise Dead is common enough and acceptable enough for this to be a valid option. Brust's Drageara is something like that. It's common in certain circles to assassinate someone to send them a message.
So yeah, kill him to keep him under control while you investigate, then raise him if necessary. Why not?
Not in your standard PF world though.
In 3.5's Complete Warrior, there was a weapon material called thianun(sp?), which would trap the soul of the last person slain by the weapon.
An evil revolutionary faction in my campaign world would arm its assassins with daggers made of the stuff, which were stored in their vaults after use.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I like low-tech, low-magic solutions better! :)
A set of quieting needles costs 25 gp. Inserted into a
corpse’s heart, lungs, and other organs, the needles can
be well hidden inside a slain body with a minute of work
and a Sleight of Hand check—the result of this Sleight of
Hand check determines the Heal check DC to notice the
use of quieting needles on a corpse. This Heal check gains a
cumulative +1 bonus for each day the body has been allowed
to decay, as the presence of the needles grows increasingly
obvious as the flesh rots away.
A body pierced with quieting needles can be brought
back to life as normal via raise dead, but upon being restored
to life, the victim immediately begins suffering from the fact
that his major organs are perforated by hidden needles. This
grisly fate can even strike someone brought back to life via
resurrection or true resurrection if the body itself was intact
and the needles were thus hidden. (Casting resurrection
or true resurrection with only a fragment of the body or no
body, forcing the spell to rebuild the body as appropriate, is
a surefire way to avoid having the victim come back to life
with the needles still inside him.)
A creature brought back to life with quieting needles
inside him is immediately struck with pain and must make
a DC 25 Fortitude save each round to avoid being nauseated
from the pain and suffering 1d6 points of Constitution
damage. A successful Fortitude save negates the nauseated
condition and reduces the Constitution damage to 1.
Removing quieting needles from a dead body takes
1d6+6 rounds (and a DC 20 Heal check if the process is to
leave the body in a condition where raise dead is still viable).
Removing quieting needles from a freshly restored living
body causes 2d6 points of damage per round the procedure
continues, with a successful DC 25 Heal check reducing
damage caused that round to 2.
The use of quieting needles is relatively uncommon,
meant as much to punish enemies for attempting to raise
dead allies and force them to waste the resources on such
expensive magic as well as to cause the restored creature
agonizing pain—using quieting needles is an evil act that is
as illegal as murder in most civilized regions.
A set of quieting needles costs 25 gp.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I like low-tech, low-magic solutions better! :)
** spoiler omitted **...
Honestly you would be better off setting the corpse on fire, disolving the remains in acid and dumping what's left in a river. That way there is no risk of a heal check, resurrection or reincarnation wrecking your "solution". Its just "No level 9 spells, then no rez for u".
They are excellent if you want to be an ***hole though.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
You know, I love reading over some of the morality debates. Really shows how sociopathic some gamers/people are.Honestly it creeps me the hell out how many people seem to be sociopath and amoral in such threads.
It amuses me how judgmental people can be about opinions regarding a fantasy game.
It's been said a couple of times, but 'Phylactery of faithfulness' is really the correct answer here.
Then you attempt to murder the guy for high treason and disregarding the rules of his country. If the GM doesn't then tell you that this is against your paladining, then you're clear. If he does, then you know to stop.
Just keep it in your bag and switch headbands before any important moral choice.
|
|
I like low-tech, low-magic solutions better! :)
** spoiler omitted **...
Honestly you would be better off setting the corpse on fire, disolving the remains in acid and dumping what's left in a river. That way there is no risk of a heal check, resurrection or reincarnation wrecking your "solution". Its just "No level 9 spells, then no rez for u".
They are excellent if you want to be an ***hole though.
And honestly pretty easily fixable by the levels you're talking about.
Heal him up, keep healing him while you pull the needles and you're done.
I don't think there's a limit on how many needles you can put in him... :)
...and you all assume that the healer's heal check will beat the assassin's sleight of hand... not my maxed out DEX unchained rogue! no you don't! :)
The fact the queen ordered/asked him to kill a defenseless person should give him pause.
If he respects her/their legitimate authority, he'd honor the prince's request.
There's so many ways for that to be the wrong decision...
|
|
I like low-tech, low-magic solutions better! :)
** spoiler omitted **...
Honestly you would be better off setting the corpse on fire, disolving the remains in acid and dumping what's left in a river. That way there is no risk of a heal check, resurrection or reincarnation wrecking your "solution". Its just "No level 9 spells, then no rez for u".
They are excellent if you want to be an ***hole though.
And honestly pretty easily fixable by the levels you're talking about.
Heal him up, keep healing him while you pull the needles and you're done.
I don't think there's a limit on how many needles you can put in him... :)
...and you all assume that the healer's heal check will beat the assassin's sleight of hand... not my maxed out DEX unchained rogue! no you don't! :)
That DC is only to notice before raising him. After that it's a flat d6+6 rounds to get the needles out with a DC 25 to minimize damage.
I guess you could use multiple sets of them. If you really want to be sure, you're still better off getting rid of the body instead.
I think it's one of the best detailed, low-cost game mechanics available to prevent raise dead and severely impair resurrection / greater resurrection. Remember that if no one beats the Sleight of Hand DC with the Heal check, they don't see the needles, and may end up wasting a lot of money (especially if they cast Resurrection or True Resurrection on the body!) I know it's not full proof, but in a day to day, general game world, it almost is. The assassin can do this on the spot with a minute of work.
The fire/acid solution mentioned above require a lot of stars to align properly (i.e. subject to DM fiat), requires you to carry the body to an acid tank or carry acid to some kind of tub (lair required; lots of time required, etc.) and even then DM can pull a "lock of hair" resurrection somewhere else to undo your efforts (i.e. if the assassin is paid to dispose of the body with quieting needles, she could also keep a part of the body for "insurance"... with instructions to deliver to family if the assassin is targeted for murder).
He shouldn't fall if he executes the ex-king. He should realize the error after the fact, and atone for it. Resurrecting him and helping to rid the country of the manipulating queen.Doing it because 'well, if I'm wrong, we can just raise him from the dead' is so many steps of justifying murder that I'm not sure you have any idea what it means to act heroic.Sometime I actually want to run a game in a world where Raise Dead is common enough and acceptable enough for this to be a valid option. Brust's Drageara is something like that. It's common in certain circles to assassinate someone to send them a message.
So yeah, kill him to keep him under control while you investigate, then raise him if necessary. Why not?
Not in your standard PF world though.
The Jhereg do that in Brust's world. You know, the family that controls Organized Crime and like, deals in assassination as their primary martial tool.
And if you call that LG behavior, wow, your grasp of the morality spectrum is waaaay different from mine.
Me casually murdering you for my own purposes because I can just Raise you later if I feel like it doesn't make it not Murder. You still live or die at my whim, for my reasons, and I don't care about your life at all.
That's pragmatic Evil at its finest.
==Aelryinth
I like low-tech, low-magic solutions better! :)
** spoiler omitted **...
Honestly you would be better off setting the corpse on fire, disolving the remains in acid and dumping what's left in a river. That way there is no risk of a heal check, resurrection or reincarnation wrecking your "solution". Its just "No level 9 spells, then no rez for u".
They are excellent if you want to be an ***hole though.
And honestly pretty easily fixable by the levels you're talking about.
Heal him up, keep healing him while you pull the needles and you're done.
I don't think there's a limit on how many needles you can put in him... :)
...and you all assume that the healer's heal check will beat the assassin's sleight of hand... not my maxed out DEX unchained rogue! no you don't! :)
That DC is only to notice before raising him. After that it's a flat d6+6 rounds to get the needles out with a DC 25 to minimize damage.
I guess you could use multiple sets of them. If you really want to be sure, you're still better off getting rid of the body instead.I think it's one of the best detailed, low-cost game mechanics available to prevent raise dead and severely impair resurrection / greater resurrection. Remember that if no one beats the Sleight of Hand DC with the Heal check, they don't see the needles, and may end up wasting a lot of money (especially if they cast Resurrection or True Resurrection on the body!) I know it's not full proof, but in a day to day, general game world, it almost is. The assassin can do this on the spot with a minute of work.
The fire/acid solution mentioned above require a lot of stars to align properly (i.e. subject to DM fiat), requires you to carry the body to an acid tank or carry acid to some kind of tub (lair required; lots of time required, etc.) and even then DM can pull a "lock of hair" resurrection somewhere...
For argument's sake, lets assume that it is standard procedure for clerics to assume that a corpse may have been quieting needle'd and thus will pull an eyelash or something from a corpse before resurrecting, just to be on the safe side.
In what way is quieting needles any better than the fire and/or acid (either will do to prevent raise dead) solution if your goal is to prevent a return to life via magic.
For that matter, how is it better than removing the jaw and the brain stem of the victim(or some other important components of the body). Quieting needle=good chance of failure, while removing vital parts = guarenteed failure if raise dead is being used.
Huh, phylacteries used to be worn around the upper arm, not the head. Learn something new about PF every day.
==Aelryinth
It amuses me how judgmental people can be about opinions regarding a fantasy game.
You know, I love reading over some of the morality debates. Really shows how sociopathic some gamers/people are.Honestly it creeps me the hell out how many people seem to be sociopath and amoral in such threads.
A lot of people seem to default to the idea that anyone who disagrees with them about anything must have something horribly wrong with them.
Unfortunately for the paladin, he's not fighting AGAINST the law of Cheliax, he's fighting FOR the law of his home realm.
So, no, he is not justified...he'd be subverting the very laws he's fighting for.
Bad example, Claxon.
==Aelryinth
And now we're getting into "Cheliax passes a low requiring all Paladins to commit suicide. Paladin must obey, or he falls" territory.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
The whole 'why can't my Paladin engage in this sociopathic or amoral behavior if a can lawyerize it around the Code' is what tends to set it off.
Paladins abide by the letter AND the spirit of the code. Arguing that this very, very non-LG behavior is Perfectly Acceptable if he bends his perceptions and twists the wording to suit his own convenience...
ahg. It might be lawful, and the lawyers nod their heads, but it ain't Good.
==Aelryinth
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Even Abadar frowns upon betraying the spirit of a law while not breaking the letter
Even Abadar frowns upon betraying the spirit of a law while not breaking the letter
Asmodeus, on the other hand, loves that.
Even Abadar frowns upon betraying the spirit of a law while not breaking the letterAsmodeus, on the other hand, loves that.
He doesn't have Evil, Law and Trickery as Domains for nothing.
|
|
For argument's sake, lets assume that it is standard procedure for clerics to assume that a corpse may have been quieting needle'd and thus will pull an eyelash or something from a corpse before resurrecting, just to be on the safe side.
In what way is quieting needles any better than the fire and/or acid (either will do to prevent raise dead) solution if your goal is to prevent a return to life via magic.
For that matter, how is it better than removing the jaw and the brain stem of the victim(or some other important components of the body). Quieting needle=good chance of failure, while removing vital parts = guarenteed failure if raise dead is being used.
removing organs not covered by the rules; That's why those needles are better. Feel free to flip through APs like i did and find other methods of raise dead prevention. I'd actually love to see them (no snark... i intend to run an assassin heavy campaign in October...
removing organs not covered by the rules; That's why those needles are better. Feel free to flip through APs like i did and find other methods of raise dead prevention. I'd actually love to see them (no snark... i intend to run an assassin heavy campaign in October...For argument's sake, lets assume that it is standard procedure for clerics to assume that a corpse may have been quieting needle'd and thus will pull an eyelash or something from a corpse before resurrecting, just to be on the safe side.
In what way is quieting needles any better than the fire and/or acid (either will do to prevent raise dead) solution if your goal is to prevent a return to life via magic.
For that matter, how is it better than removing the jaw and the brain stem of the victim(or some other important components of the body). Quieting needle=good chance of failure, while removing vital parts = guarenteed failure if raise dead is being used.
Ok, assuming your GM allows you to cut up, burn or melt with acid corpses like virtually any GM on the planet would...
Are needles worth using over the methods in my previous post.
If you disagree about the GM allowing you, please actually answer my question this time before arguing.
Ok, so here's what I would do if I was the Paladin in question:
First off, although Paladins are required to respect legitimate authority that does not mean they have to follow all laws of the land. They can even "Respectfully disagree", as it were, and act on their own. IMHO, YMMV.
Given that, this Paladin should question the Prince in private,using magic to ensure sincerity if if possible. Then the paladin, based on his experience and the results of said interrogation, decides on the next course of action.
This could be exile, execution, a pardon, whatever. The point is that the Prince is the paladins prisoner, not the queens. He decides what to do, Moot and nobles be damned. If the punishment is execution (for crimes committed against the paladin and his friends or the people of the nation or whatever) then so be it. Let it be a lesson to all that no one is beyond the reach of the paladins God(dess)'s judgement.
Just make it clear to the public that the paladin is dispensing judgement, not the Queen. She can turn a blind eye since he was instrumental in the prince's capture. She couldnt stop it even she wanted to.
Fir extra effect have the paladin give a speech that boils down to "You want justice? I AM JUSTICE."
|
Unfortunately for the paladin, he's not fighting AGAINST the law of Cheliax, he's fighting FOR the law of his home realm.
So, no, he is not justified...he'd be subverting the very laws he's fighting for.
Bad example, Claxon.
==Aelryinth
Paladin's don't fight for the laws of any country, or at least they don't have to. The only law they are beholden to are their god's.
Executing someone who incites war and usurps a throne would be allowed by most lawful good deities, I think. That the ex-king is justified in doing so isn't information the paladin has. He has been duped. Being dumb isn't against the paladin code.
He shouldn't fall if he executes the ex-king. He should realize the error after the fact, and atone for it. Resurrecting him and helping to rid the country of the manipulating queen.
And please note I'm not saying this is the best course of action, but if that is the course of action taken it does not constitute a course of action worthy of falling.
People make mistakes, and even paladins are fallible people even if they seek not to be.
I always err on the side of "Who's the paladin's god?" in things like this. This leads to problems when a player wants to make a Paladin who gets their powers from "The forces of law and good themselves", but prevents huge headaches with these conundrums in the middle of the game.
Ok, so here's what I would do if I was the Paladin in question:
First off, although Paladins are required to respect legitimate authority that does not mean they have to follow all laws of the land. They can even "Respectfully disagree", as it were, and act on their own. IMHO, YMMV.
Given that, this Paladin should question the Prince in private,using magic to ensure sincerity if if possible. Then the paladin, based on his experience and the results of said interrogation, decides on the next course of action.
This could be exile, execution, a pardon, whatever. The point is that the Prince is the paladins prisoner, not the queens. He decides what to do, Moot and nobles be damned. If the punishment is execution (for crimes committed against the paladin and his friends or the people of the nation or whatever) then so be it. Let it be a lesson to all that no one is beyond the reach of the paladins God(dess)'s judgement.
Just make it clear to the public that the paladin is dispensing judgement, not the Queen. She can turn a blind eye since he was instrumental in the prince's capture. She couldnt stop it even she wanted to.
Fir extra effect have the paladin give a speech that boils down to "You want justice? I AM JUSTICE."
Post 2, in which I reply to myself:
The paladin in question could give the new queen an ultimatum of sorts; either she gives the Prince a trial and he washes his hands of the whole business, or they call off the betrothal and he takes matters into his own hands as described above. Because a legitimate paladin is not a national puppet or executioner (unless he is a paladin of Abadar, in which case a trial is most definitely in order).
Because the above mentioned speech has much less meaning coming from the Queens betrothed. Also this ultimatum will help demonstrate how much the Queen really cares for her betrothed.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A paladin falls for a single evil act, but not a single chaotic act. Likewise, while the paladin is required to respect legitimate authority they are not always required to obey it (though respectful disobedience general requires willingly accepting any penalties attached to disobedience). Therefore there are some situations in which a paladin may break a legitimate law in order to avoid doing evil or breaking other parts of the code – for example, if the law requires he fail to punish someone who has harmed innocents and let that person free to harm more innocents.
However that would require a reasonable level of confidence that breaking the law is in fact necessary to do good. The legal concepts of the reasonable doubt and due diligence are useful here. If the paladin has not done everything he reasonably can do to verify that the accused is in fact guilty and that the trial will exonerate him or if he has investigated and doubts that these two things are true, then he's not in the right to execute the accused.
The fact that the prince in this case was unaffected by smite evil raises reasonable doubts, and since it is possible to investigate further the paladin should do so.
Whether the paladin should fall for killing the prince depends on exactly how the situation was presented at the table and what the expectations have been for the game so far. If you've spent 6+ levels allowing PCs to execute prisoners without asking questions (or if you've thrown neutral assassins at the party) then it's not really fair to expect that the player or the paladin will treat this situation differently. However if the paladin follows a more merciful code and you've previously encouraged the party to take prisoners and attempt to redeem villains, then you can expect that the paladin should take the warning sign(s) here seriously.
I would probably in either case inform/remind the paladin's player that "When you called on your holy powers to smite this evildoer, they did not heed you. Are you sure you still want to slay him, without allowing him to defend his actions?"
There's a whole difference between stasis imprisonment and murder. The side benefit is you don't have to actually live the tedious, dull 40 years of imprisonment...bam, it's done, you are seventy years older, life has passed you by, and you get to regret your stupid youthful indiscretions as an old man with no power, and now you can face a Moot not packed with your supporters.
...
Petrifying a prisoner is cost effective, stops escape attempts, minimizes the amount of space, maximizes security, and solves a really thorny issue neatly. It can be taken care of with a simple Break Enchantment, it can be administered with a pet gorgon or basilisk, or maybe a Medusa, for basically no cost.Mass Petrification is how you store people for long periods of time when low on resources, or being unwilling to pay those resources. Any decently advanced D&D society would use it. Since there's no system shock risk anymore, its a perfectly safe and legitimate form of jail time.
If you can work in the aging mechanism, or do like FR and actually keep them partially aware so they know time is passing, that's even better, because it actually becomes a punishment, instead of just time travel.
The tedious, dull 40 years of imprisonment is if the prison system is working the period in which you have a chance to find redemption - not just to regret getting caught but to realize why what you did was strong, to consider means of restitution, and prepare for a moral life once you are released. Petrifying someone for long periods may keep them off the streets and once released reduces the chance they'll still have criminal contacts but it doesn't provide that chance for reflection. If they're partially aware I'd say it goes past punishment and into torture - being unable to interact with your environment for 40 years would probably drive you insane.
Paladins abide by the letter AND the spirit of the code. Arguing that this very, very non-LG behavior is Perfectly Acceptable if he bends his perceptions and twists the wording to suit his own convenience...
The problem is that sometimes people will disagree about the spirit of the code or the LG alignment, and in these cases people might also refer to the letter of the law to demonstrate (in their mind) that it is against neither.
If she really wanted the ex-king dead, ask literally anyone who's alignment does not contain good or law and you've got a pretty good shot that they'll do it no moral quandaries involved. Presumably, the ex-king is appropriately restrained or locked up making him a very easy target to coup-de-grace in the middle of the night. A potion of silence and a light pick are all you really need. That DC 30+ fort save or die can be the end of him in a very silent night.
I did something similar once. The party was being manipulated by a succubus - they took a prisoner in for questioning and she killed him in custody. Unfortunately she didn't cover her tracks well enough and the party realized they'd been had. Though in this case it wouldn't have lasted much longer anyway - the party had drawn the attention of an inquisitor who would have clued them in.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
It's been said a couple of times, but 'Phylactery of faithfulness' is really the correct answer here.
Then you attempt to murder the guy for high treason and disregarding the rules of his country. If the GM doesn't then tell you that this is against your paladining, then you're clear. If he does, then you know to stop.
Just keep it in your bag and switch headbands before any important moral choice.
"This is a tough moral quandary we have here... Let me put on my thinking cap!"
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
"Items: They're just better than you."