RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
The way I would rule at my table:
A single-classed paladin of a Good-aligned god couldn't use a wand of infernal healing. It's an [Evil] spell.
A single-classed paladin of a Lawful Neutral god, like Abadar or Irori, would be in violation of the Paladin's strictures against performing evil. The very attempt to use the wand would lock a paladin away from her powers.
A character with levels in paladin and bloodrager (a class that, I am surprised to read, has no alignment restrictions) is capable of casting the spell through his bloodrager spellcasting ability, unlike a single-classed paladin. But "just because you can do something, doesn't mean you should"; casting the spell would still result in the character removing himself from his paladin powers until receiving an atonement.
As with all such things, I would make sure the player understood the penalty involved before casting the spell.
Your mileage may vary.
|
I personally agree with Chris about this. I might handle it a little differently, but if the paladin continues to use the wand (or the spell) he will be risking falling.
First time he were to try and use it, I would remind him that this is an evil act that breaks his code. If the player goes ahead and does it, I would do nothing.... Immediately.
Then, if he were to try to cast a paladin spell. Or use a Paladins normal,abilities (such as detect evil, smite, etc), the ability would fail (or take longer to activate). I would tell him that his dirty is giving him a final warning before it is too late (though one like Torag may not give any warning)
If he were to do it again, he would be cut off from all Paladins abilities, a fact that would be noted on his chronicle.
|
|
A single-classed paladin of a Good-aligned god couldn't use a wand of infernal healing. It's an [Evil] spell.
First time he were to try and use it, I would remind him that this is an evil act that breaks his code.
Is casting (or using a wand of) infernal healing an evil act? Or does doing so simply violate the paladin's code because said spell has the Evil descriptor? Without violating his code, could a paladin use such a wand on a dying companion if there were no other means of healing available?
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Out of character knowledge of the mechanics of Infernal Healing is, IMO, the more likely reason why the player of a Paladin would be inclined to use it. Ironically, I believe that's why the spell was designed the way it was: to be more tempting than a 1d8+1 Cure Light Wounds. Bravo to whoever designed it.
Paladins should be avoiding (or cleansing) the influence of evil wherever and whenever they can. Allowing a companion to die and be brought back to life later would still be "less evil" than resorting to using a wand of Infernal Healing.
A prepared Paladin (or a worried player) could instead:
- Prepare Cure Light Wounds in an available 1st level spell slot.
- Carry around a 1st level Pearl of Power.
- Carry a scroll, oil, wand or potion of Cure Light Wounds.
- Put ranks into UMD and purchase a 375gp wand of Stabilize.
- Always have one Lay on Hands available for a fallen ally.
- Quit dumping Wisdom to 7 and invest a rank in Heal.
|
|
Hell, the responsibility need not fall solely on the Paladin. If you're a Wizard that runs on Devil blood, and you know your next mission involves traveling with a Paladin, you might just want to purchase your own [item] of Cure Light Wounds so that the Paladin has an option to use on you when you go down.
Contributor
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Barring an official word from John, Linda, or the next campaign coordinator, this whole thread boils down to one of the more crucial parts of the Guide:
"Expect table variation"
You may find yourself at a table with a GM who doesn't care, or a GM who asks that you justify it, or a GM who will have your PC lose their powers for even suggesting it. Be ready to accept whatever decision that GM makes, and keep playing.
|
A single-classed paladin of a Good-aligned god couldn't use a wand of infernal healing. It's an [Evil] spell.First time he were to try and use it, I would remind him that this is an evil act that breaks his code.Is casting (or using a wand of) infernal healing an evil act? Or does doing so simply violate the paladin's code because said spell has the Evil descriptor? Without violating his code, could a paladin use such a wand on a dying companion if there were no other means of healing available?
Sometimes there are no right answers. He could use the wand, possibly requiring atonement as a result for casting an evil spell. Or he could do nothing and watch his ally die, possibly requiring atonement for his inaction.
In this case the answer may be to skip the wand and use the heal skill to stabilize, using the wand only as a last resort. Unfortunately that may require either leaving the wizard behind while the rest of the group continues the mission, or abandoning the mission.
Sometimes playing a character with a code of conduct is hard.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Hell, the responsibility need not fall solely on the Paladin. If you're a Wizard that runs on Devil blood, and you know your next mission involves traveling with a Paladin, you might just want to purchase your own [item] of Cure Light Wounds so that the Paladin has an option to use on you when you go down.
"Where is your potion of cure light founds and what did you label it as"
|
this thread is getting out of hand. while i am not good at manipulating the forums i found the post where mike brock called out spacifically that casting an evil spell is not an evil act. this would be the post the lead to the creation of the faq but the post is more clarifying and applies to pfs. therefor when i gm i do not care what spell you cast but ur intent for the spell.
http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2qe61&page=1?Official-Clarification-Request -Is-Casting
Grand Lodge ***** Michael Brock Aug 6, 2012, 04:50 pm | FLAG | LIST
| FAQ | REPLY
19 people marked this as FAQ candidate. Answered in the FAQ. You and 40 others marked this as a favorite.-
Mike Brock
Casting an evil spell is not an alignment infraction in and of itself, as long as it doesn't violate any codes, tenents of faith, or other such issues.
Committing an evil act outside of casting the spell, such as using an evil spell to torture an innocent NPC for information or the like is an alignment infraction. Using infernal healing to heal party members is not an evil act.
I can't possibly define what every evil act could be. That is why I rely on GM discretion. But simply casting an evil descriptor spell is not an evil act in and of itself.
|
|
correct the codes part is critical my point is the casting an evil spell is not an evil act.the paladin code calls out they can not commit an evil act.
from prd
Code of Conduct: A paladin must be of lawful good alignment and loses all class features except proficiencies if she ever willingly commits an evil act.
Additionally, a paladin's code requires that she respect legitimate authority, act with honor (not lying, not cheating, not using poison, and so forth), help those in need (provided they do not use the help for evil or chaotic ends), and punish those who harm or threaten innocents.
|
|
I'd say 90+% of the time I avoid these sorts of discussions. I've taken quite a few courses in philosophy and have debates on the nature of good and evil with many types of people. In general, I don't agree that there is such thing as good or evil in this world, and I take as much of that mindset with me as I can into Pathfinder.
I even have a Paladin that fully endorses lawful slavery, and currently owns 6 slaves. He's a follower of Rowdrosh, the Divine Herdsman, and would be a hypocrite to punish slavers when he leads around a small herd of goats.
But, unlike the real world, Pathfinder has alignment descriptors. They define things as good/evil/lawful/chaotic, and aren't merely fluff. There are mechanics behind them. This is one of those times where I pause a bit in my application of good vs evil. Purchasing/owning slaves, performing a coup de grace, and bargaining with murderers aren't actions that have an alignment descriptor, but Infernal Healing does.
I feel that's why Mike inserted that clause into his statement. If he purely meant to say that it wasn't an evil act, then he would have said just that, but he didn't. He's been very purposeful in how he phrases things. I believe he meant that casting the spell isn't an evil act, unless it violates the tenets of your faith.
Now, after all that's been said, I can't recall ever having this issue come up at a table. I've only ever written down an alignment infraction once, and that was for a PC who sacrificed an intelligent captive to their evil god. No Paladins involved. Most Paladins I've encountered roleplay as the types who avoid evil, and wouldn't consider using Infernal Healing anyways. If one was considering it, they wouldn't need me to tell them that their god would be displeased. And even if they went through the motions (and didn't atone for them), and I wrote something down on their Chronicle, it wouldn't be anything more than "begun the journey to embracing the Dark Side", or something. I wouldn't force an alignment shift for one infraction, though if I noticed that they were repeat offenders, I might consider it.
Finally, as with anything else of this vague nature, YMMV. Keep running your tables your way. I won't enforce my practices on anyone else, and I for one would hope that this never gets codified in the Guide.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The point I'm seeing is that the base paladin code states:
"A paladin must be of lawful good alignment and loses all class features except proficiencies if she ever willingly commits an evil act."
And the powers that be have stated that casting an evil spell is not in and of itself an evil act.
Therefore, a paladin using infernal healing would not cause them to fall or even risk falling, unless the code of their specific god demands such.
Case in point, the code for Shelyn's paladins states nothing about never cast an evil spell. So I'd not make a paladin of Shelyn fall at my table for using Infernal Healing.
Likewise for a Paladin of Abadar, since he pretty much doesn't like stupid laws, and thus I don't see him stripping his paladins of power for using the best resources available, or potentially the only ones available.
Regional Venture-Coordinator, Baltic
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
To understand a ruling, you have to understand why the ruling was in place anyway.
So why is casting a spell with the evil descriptor not considered an evil act in Pathfinder Society by itself?
Well, according to the actual Pathfinder rules any casting of an evil spell is an evil act and will slowly turn you evil, so in a homegame the GM can track this and if the character in question doesn't balance this out by doing good, this will cause a shift towards evil.
In Society you've got multiple GMs and no way to track these minor infractions, so the ruling was made to ignore the lesser evils of casting evil spells (and channeling negative/inflicting), unless used to do something very bad like torture, murdering innocents and the like for the purpose of alignment shifts, as turning evil would invalidate a character.
A paladin is the actual summit of good, and held to the highest standards. So even if he only does a little evil this will affect his powers. He won't shift to Neutral or Evil, but he will need to atone to regain his paladin powers.
|
|
case in fact brock spacifically called out that it is not an evil act in society the only ones restricted from casting it are those whose class features say so. ie cleric/inquisitor not a pali. ive read that post completely plus the secondary post where brock stated that after discussing it with john they are not changing the ruling that he established on aug 6th 2012
|
|
To understand a ruling, you have to understand why the ruling was in place anyway.
So why is casting a spell with the evil descriptor not considered an evil act in Pathfinder Society by itself?
Well, according to the actual Pathfinder rules any casting of an evil spell is an evil act and will slowly turn you evil, so in a homegame the GM can track this and if the character in question doesn't balance this out by doing good, this will cause a shift towards evil.
In Society you've got multiple GMs and no way to track these minor infractions, so the ruling was made to ignore the lesser evils of casting evil spells (and channeling negative/inflicting), unless used to do something very bad like torture, murdering innocents and the like for the purpose of alignment shifts, as turning evil would invalidate a character.
A paladin is the actual summit of good, and held to the highest standards. So even if he only does a little evil this will affect his powers. He won't shift to Neutral or Evil, but he will need to atone to regain his paladin powers.
wrong in the pali code is says they lose their powers if they commit an evil act. brock has declared that casting a spell with the evil DESCRIPTOR is not an evil act. therefor a pali does not need to atone. as per it being a rule in pathfinder that evil discriptor means evil act please cite where you found this rule.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
wrong in the pali code is says they lose their powers if they commit an evil act. brock has declared that casting a spell with the evil DESCRIPTOR is not an evil act. therefor a pali does not need to atone. as per it being a rule in pathfinder that evil discriptor means evil act please cite where you found this rule.
Using poison is not an evil act either, but the paladin still can't do it.
The "and so forth" in the paladins code is a little vague but if there's anything where the DM has legitimate discretion to apply it it's with a spell clearly labeled as [evil], that uses devil blood to infuse you with the power of hell to the point that you ping on your own detect evil.
That is way, WAY worse than all natural organically grown fair trade blue whinnis.
I mean is there a surer sign from the gods that you shouldn't have done something than suddenly getting the urge to smite yourself?
|
|
I mean is there a surer sign from the gods that you shouldn't have done something than suddenly getting the urge to smite yourself?Why would you have that urge? Not that it would even work. You detect as, you don't become a valid target.
Isn't the first instinct of every paladin upon detecting evil to ready smite?
|
|
There should be no table variation. No matter how distasteful you personally find it, per the rules we are bound by it is explicitly not an evil act to cast an [evil]spell. It is also neither an evil act or contrary to the paladins code to heal either yourself or another. There is little to no chance of a Paladin falling or needing to atone in most circumstances.
Now if it's a paladin of Torag showing mercy to a fallen foe, or using it as an attempted deception by masking your alignment - that's a different kettle of aquatic vertebrate.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There should be no table variation. No matter how distasteful you personally find it, per the rules we are bound by it is explicitly not an evil act to cast an [evil]spell. It is also neither an evil act or contrary to the paladins code to heal either yourself or another. There is little to no chance of a Paladin falling or needing to atone in most circumstances.
I think the consensus is fairly heavily against you on this one, so if you're looking for no table variation.....
|
Isn't the first instinct of every paladin upon detecting evil to ready smite?I mean is there a surer sign from the gods that you shouldn't have done something than suddenly getting the urge to smite yourself?Why would you have that urge? Not that it would even work. You detect as, you don't become a valid target.
Paladins can detect evil? Man, that's just rude.
|
|
Unfortunately I'm about the only Paladin in my area that refuses to Smite until after I've detected evil.
Unfortunately, one can't always afford the action to detect evil. And one can sometimes smite things that do not detect as evil (due to various magics such as undetectable alignment).
If you're going to try and kill something anyway then you might as well smite if you can afford the smite.
Where Detect Evil SHOULD be used in many cases is in deciding whether to kill something or pursue other approaches (often non lethal damage).
|
|
detect evil is a bad way to judge as it only takes an evil though for someone to detect as evil. that does not mean they are nor does it mean that they can be smited it just meant that in that moment they had an evil aura/thought or intent. as per the selective reading, i do not see how that applies. the heads of pfs have made an official declaration that it is not an evil act to heal with infernal healing. pali code says you can not commit an evil act. it does not state that you can not use a spell created by an evil diety. yes i agree it is not apropriate for a pali to use it but it will not strip their abilities if they do.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Table Variation. That's the key takeaway here.
If you don't like that answer, then err on the conservative side, and don't do the action that's questionable. How do I know its questionable?
The fact it was asked at all, and this thread prove that its a questionable act.
I prefer to look at what is written. Figure out what's intended by looking at what's written, context, and the many conversations had by the venture officer corps when this query came up. Then come up with an answer that I consider common sense and that makes good sense given what Paladin's are supposed to stand for.
I believe that with what's written, RAW fully supports causing a paladin to fall. Even given the FAQ, the clause that paraphrases as, "except for those with a special code," indicates that Paladins might fall if they cast an evil spell. What was intended also fully supports this. My version of common sense supports this. And what Paladins stand for supports this.
So I'm 4 for 4 that says Paladins will need an atonement to not be considered an ex-Paladin if they choose to cast infernal healing.
Others may disagree with me. And I'm fine with that.
Thus, Table Variation.
|
|
i fully support table variation until i see a post by brock stating as campeign leadership that a ruling is so. at that point wether im the gm or the player i will go by what brock says. i would xpect the officers to support something that the campeign leadership decides. this subject really should not have that much table variation.
1. pali code says you can not commit an evil act.
2. it does not say you can not cast an evil spell.
3. no where does it state that is a spell with an evil discriptor is an evil act.
4. campeign leadership has stated for purposes of pfs that casting an evil discripor spell is not an evill act, more precisely healing a party member with infernal healing is not an evil act.
based on those 4 points a pali should be just fine, people may not agree and that is fine as you are welcome to your opinion but the powers that be made an official ruling and as officers, gms and players we are expected to honor what they decide.
|
|
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
i fully support table variation until i see a post by brock stating as campeign leadership that a ruling is so. at that point wether im the gm or the player i will go by what brock says. i would xpect the officers to support something that the campeign leadership decides. this subject really should not have that much table variation.
1. pali code says you can not commit an evil act.
2. it does not say you can not cast an evil spell.
3. no where does it state that is a spell with an evil discriptor is an evil act.
4. campeign leadership has stated for purposes of pfs that casting an evil discripor spell is not an evill act, more precisely healing a party member with infernal healing is not an evil act.based on those 4 points a pali should be just fine, people may not agree and that is fine as you are welcome to your opinion but the powers that be made an official ruling and as officers, gms and players we are expected to honor what they decide.
1) The guide says message board posts are binding, unless superseded by the FAQ or Guide.
2) The FAQ that sprang up from Mike Brock's message board post, supersedes the message board post.Casting an evil spell is not an alignment infraction in and of itself...
Secondly, as one of the VOs that helped Mike write this FAQ, I can unequivocally say that the lines in the FAQ that finish the above quoted sentence
...as long as it doesn't violate any codes, tenents of faith, or other such issues.
was intended so that Paladins and other good aligned clerics would NOT be able to cast infernal healing.
You can quote RAW all you want, but RAW supports my stance. RAI supports my stance. My inside knowledge supports my stance. And good common sense supports my stance.
You don't have to like it. But please don't lecture me about upholding campaign rules when you are just trying to use a narrow view of RAW to loophole your way into what you want.