| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Right... but that's not Pathfinder.I don't see how that's relevant.
[small]Presumably we're discussing Pathfinder. I mean, otherwise the whole concept of what is right and not for a Paladin to do or what is good alignment or not falls apart as there's a hundred different interpretations of Paladins and hundred different alignment systems in various games.
This _is_ the Pathfinder RPG subforum after all, and when talking about creatures I'm going to assume black dragons can swim and goblins are smaller than humans regardless of how other games portray creatures that they call goblins or black dragons.[/small]
Still don't see the relevance. I said I could have a neutral lich. I never said Pathfinder could.
That's fair I guess.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Wait, since when can you redeem fiends? I thought as beings composed of evil they didn't truly have free will, as in, a demon who ceases to be Chaotic Evil ceases to exist.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Wait, since when can you redeem fiends? I thought as beings composed of evil they didn't truly have free will, as in, a demon who ceases to be Chaotic Evil ceases to exist.
Usually ceases to be a Demon and becomes something else
Right... but that's not Pathfinder.
Because this is a Pathfinder message board. The default assumption is Pathfinder. Should I start talking about half-vamp Daywalkers when vampires are brought up with no context? Maybe sparkling in sunlight?
Presumably we're discussing Pathfinder. I mean, otherwise the whole concept of what is right and not for a Paladin to do or what is good alignment or not falls apart as there's a hundred different interpretations of Paladins and hundred different alignment systems in various games.
This _is_ the Pathfinder RPG subforum after all, and when talking about creatures I'm going to assume black dragons can swim and goblins are smaller than humans regardless of how other games portray creatures that they call goblins or black dragons.
Given that we're talking about Pathfinder and Golarion ,can someone tell me how do you become a Lich in this setting?
I always thought that as of now the ritual is undefined for what concerns Golarion or PF as a ruleset.
On a semi-related note James Jacobs on a comment implied the possibility of one being turned into a Lich by someone else, even against his will.
Wait, since when can you redeem fiends? I thought as beings composed of evil they didn't truly have free will, as in, a demon who ceases to be Chaotic Evil ceases to exist.
In terms of Pathfinder, there's been a few around in AP's I think. As far as D&D-ish systems in general, at least since AD&D; Fall-From-Grace is a famous "redeemed" (or as she calls it, "fallen") succubus. Though she's neutral, not good.
Given that we're talking about Pathfinder and Golarion ,can someone tell me how do you become a Lich in this setting?I always thought that as of now the ritual is undefined for what concerns Golarion or PF as a ruleset.
You undergo a long ritual and then you're turned into an evil lich. What happens after then is silent, so you could possibly change alignment (the books are silent on it), but becoming evil is part of the process for becoming a lich.
|
His mistake here isnt deciding to bring a surrendered foe in, his mistake is turning his back on her and allowing her to teleport away. Hes completely in the right to offer even the most evil being a chance to surrender and prove its innocence. That kind of action is even required in the 3.5 Book of Exalted Deeds.
Keep in mind that “turning your back” here means “one round in which the paladin doesn't have a readied action to stab the succubus if she tries something funny.” That's all it takes. By your own admission, securely proving a demon is not evil takes high level magic that a paladin generally does not have direct access to. Do you think it's likely that a paladin will be able to find someone capable of casting those spells without glancing away from the succubus or letting his sword hand falter for so much as six seconds? When the succubus is trying to engineer exactly such a distraction using her considerable guile and natural telepathy? She could goad the villagers into attacking the paladin while outwardly appearing to be asking them to stand down. Or she could prompt them to come with her – to make sure the paladin wasn't about to execute her as soon as they left city limits – and then if they encounter any danger whatsoever on the road the paladin has a choice between defending his escort and keeping the prisoner secure.
Theres a passage about falling in the book of exalted deeds.
It says that a Paladin who is climbing a cliff and starts a landslide that kills a peasants hut, then he falls or doesnt fall based on circumastance.
...
If he knew it was there and that the ground was loose but thought his climb skill was good enough to not cause any problems, then he does fall. He needs an atonement for his pride getting in the way of the potential to cause evil.
I'd say that this passage very well describes a paladin who believes that his skill is enough to keep a captured succubus from escaping and causing more evil.
Wait, since when can you redeem fiends? I thought as beings composed of evil they didn't truly have free will, as in, a demon who ceases to be Chaotic Evil ceases to exist.
Angels are composed of good and can change alignment, so evil can change too.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Keep in mind that “turning your back” here means “one round in which the paladin doesn't have a readied action to stab the succubus if she tries something funny.”
Or for that matter leaving her out of reach for a second. Even if bound down and gagged and dimensional anchored, she can still Dominate Person. And since you can't ready a coup de grace, it's a risk anyway.
Don't get me wrong - I don't think the creature being powerful on it's own is enough of a justification for killing it - but in the specific case of fiends, and _especially_ demons, and _in particular_ succubi, I think it's such an extreme risk to take.
If it was basically any other creature, whether an orc or troll or fire giant or even aboleth, I think it'd be very iffy. But when it comes to demons, that's a special case.
Wait, since when can you redeem fiends? I thought as beings composed of evil they didn't truly have free will, as in, a demon who ceases to be Chaotic Evil ceases to exist.Angels are composed of good and can change alignment, so evil can change too.
While I agree with the conclusion (there have been non-evil fiends in pathfinder), alignment doesn't necessarily have to be symmetrical. It would be very possible for the essense of good to be corruptible but for the essense of evil to be irredeemable.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
The quest to become a lich is a lengthy one. While construction of the magical phylactery to contain the spellcaster's soul is a critical component, a prospective lich must also learn the secrets of transferring his soul into the receptacle and of preparing his body for the transformation into undeath, neither of which are simple tasks. Further complicating the ritual is the fact that no two bodies or souls are exactly alike—a ritual that works for one spellcaster might simply kill another or drive him insane. The exact methods for each spellcaster's transformation are left to the GM's discretion, but should involve expenditures of hundreds of thousands of gold pieces, numerous deadly adventures, and a large number of difficult skill checks over the course of months, years, or decades.
It's so horrible.
The quest to become a lich is a lengthy one. While construction of the magical phylactery to contain the spellcaster's soul is a critical component, a prospective lich must also learn the secrets of transferring his soul into the receptacle and of preparing his body for the transformation into undeath, neither of which are simple tasks. Further complicating the ritual is the fact that no two bodies or souls are exactly alike—a ritual that works for one spellcaster might simply kill another or drive him insane. The exact methods for each spellcaster's transformation are left to the GM's discretion, but should involve expenditures of hundreds of thousands of gold pieces, numerous deadly adventures, and a large number of difficult skill checks over the course of months, years, or decades.It's so horrible.
and nothing evil about it, so there is a chance to create a ritual to turn yourself into an archlich(good lich)
Keep in mind that “turning your back” here means “one round in which the paladin doesn't have a readied action to stab the succubus if she tries something funny.”Or for that matter leaving her out of reach for a second. Even if bound down and gagged and dimensional anchored, she can still Dominate Person. And since you can't ready a coup de grace, it's a risk anyway.
Don't get me wrong - I don't think the creature being powerful on it's own is enough of a justification for killing it - but in the specific case of fiends, and _especially_ demons, and _in particular_ succubi, I think it's such an extreme risk to take.
If it was basically any other creature, whether an orc or troll or fire giant or even aboleth, I think it'd be very iffy. But when it comes to demons, that's a special case.
How about crafting shackles of continuous anti magic field confined to the wearer?
and nothing evil about it, so there is a chance to create a ritual to turn yourself into an archlich(good lich)The quest to become a lich is a lengthy one. While construction of the magical phylactery to contain the spellcaster's soul is a critical component, a prospective lich must also learn the secrets of transferring his soul into the receptacle and of preparing his body for the transformation into undeath, neither of which are simple tasks. Further complicating the ritual is the fact that no two bodies or souls are exactly alike—a ritual that works for one spellcaster might simply kill another or drive him insane. The exact methods for each spellcaster's transformation are left to the GM's discretion, but should involve expenditures of hundreds of thousands of gold pieces, numerous deadly adventures, and a large number of difficult skill checks over the course of months, years, or decades.It's so horrible.
There are no archliches in pathfinder. You could of course house rule it, but you could also house rule that all liches get purple chairs attached to their forehead. Becoming a lich makes you evil in Pathfinder, as much is explicitly written in the rules.
Creating a Lich
“Lich” is an acquired template that can be added to any living creature (referred to hereafter as the base creature), provided it can create the required phylactery. A lich retains all the base creature's statistics and special abilities except as noted here.
//
Alignment: Any evil.
That doesn't mean the rules preclude a lich from changing alignment once it is a lich - the rules are just silent on it, the same way they're silent on whether all liches have purple chairs attached to their foreheads.
(Okay granted the example of purple chairs was a bit hyperbolic, but I like the imagery, and you could just as easily replace it with whatever else thing could be houserules)
|
|
The official statement on redemption of fiends is as follows:
Creatures with an evil subtype (generally outsiders) are creatures that are fundamentally evil: devils, daemons, and demons, for instance. Their redemption is rare, if it is even possible. They are evil to their very core, and commit evil acts perpetually and persistently. Mortals with an evil alignment, however, are different from these beings. - Champions of Purity p 15
Also seen here.
A tiefling is not comparable to a succubus. A tiefling is a mortal who has some blood relation that is some kind of fiend. A succubus is a demon created from the souls of lustful, predatory, evil mortals for the sole purpose of death and destruction. EDIT: To clarify, there's nothing wrong with lustfulness, but them being described as "lusftul and rapacious" hints at things less than consensual.
In addition, a good tiefling would not detect as evil.
So yeah, a paladin killing a tiefling because of her prejudice of a mortal, free-willed subspecies? I'd have her fall in a heartbeat.
When it comes to succubi, or devourers, or mohrgs, or wraiths, or pit fiends, things are very different from when dealing with a human who's gramps' gramp was a succubus.
UnArcaneElection's scenario suggested that a tiefling had been mis-identified as a succubus. Since they had cast Greater Infernal Healing on themselves, they would detect as evil. From the paladin's POV the situation would look almost identical.
If a serial killer suddenly feels bad about it - that doesn't mean that he still shouldn't be executed. In fact - if he's truly repentant he should go along with it.
Justice only works if everyone is punished for their actions - not just those who don't feel bad about it afterwards.
I agree that remorse shouldn't excuse you from accountability, but disagree that death is an appropriate punishment for a truly repentant serial killer. The most powerful forms of redemption involve the penitent working hard and making personal sacrifices in order to do good. This is called Restorative Justice.
A succubus who has become a paladin with all that implies, and who is working to heal others at the cost of her own vitality, is living justice and does not deserve to die.
The only reason I believe that killing this succubus is a reasonable course of action is that from the paladin's perspective it's much more likely that she's an immediate threat to innocents than that she is redeemed.
|
True, but a lich can reform?It's a moot point. If he feels bad about it - he still needs to be destroyed. (Not that I'd believe him anyway.)
If a serial killer suddenly feels bad about it - that doesn't mean that he still shouldn't be executed. In fact - if he's truly repentant he should go along with it.
Justice only works if everyone is punished for their actions - not just those who don't feel bad about it afterwards.
What if he got a bunch of willing volunteers who knew that his research was too important to be wasted and then he used his untold magical powers to bring them all back after.
Is he still unredeemable?
So... he's a cult leader who convinced a bunch of people to drink the Kool-Aid in order to give himself immortality?
Yep. Still evil.
UnArcaneElection's scenario suggested that a tiefling had been mis-identified as a succubus. Since they had cast Greater Infernal Healing on themselves, they would detect as evil. From the paladin's POV the situation would look almost identical.A tiefling is not comparable to a succubus. A tiefling is a mortal who has some blood relation that is some kind of fiend. A succubus is a demon created from the souls of lustful, predatory, evil mortals for the sole purpose of death and destruction. EDIT: To clarify, there's nothing wrong with lustfulness, but them being described as "lusftul and rapacious" hints at things less than consensual.
In addition, a good tiefling would not detect as evil.
So yeah, a paladin killing a tiefling because of her prejudice of a mortal, free-willed subspecies? I'd have her fall in a heartbeat.
When it comes to succubi, or devourers, or mohrgs, or wraiths, or pit fiends, things are very different from when dealing with a human who's gramps' gramp was a succubus.
Ah. Yes, that certainly makes it more comparable. Ultimately, I think it depends: How often do tieflings look like succubi? If it's common in that world, fault is with the paladin. If there's no reasonable way the paladin would have suspected it was anything but a succubus, _and_ they did go to the extra step to detect evil and found it was evil, then I think it's still an "honest mistake", and not cause for the paladin to fall, but still as with the succubus example, it would require some serious atonement, some serious regret, and some serious work to counteract the harm.
These scenarios are all very unlikely, and again I think they're comparable to a paladin coming across a giant monster munching on hundreds of crying babies, detecting it as evil [from IF] and slaying it, only to find out afterwards it was a good outsider killing off polymorphed imps.
In extremely unlikely scenarios where it really "isn't what it looks like", I think it should be treated as the severe, extremely hurtful and damaging mistake it is.
|
|
The only reason I believe that killing this succubus is a reasonable course of action is that from the paladin's perspective it's much more likely that she's an immediate threat to innocents than that she is redeemed.Except that, again, he hasnt seen her try to do anything bad to the people, the people around her are recently raised and would likely vouch on that, she was far far too weak to be a threat and he should have been able to see that (being drained from 8+ HD to 1 is probably pretty obvious, and he attacked her before she even had a chance to speak. All of that is pretty solid evidence that something strange is going on here, unless he believed that she had been drained of all her levels by her brainwashed villagers.
All he saw was a demon surrounded by adoring innocents.
So - he should have taken some time to investigate while said innocents are within arms reach of the demon?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Oath against fiends paladin s have anchoring aura and other dimensional traps anyways
|
|
would you "drink the Kool-Aid" if it meant a Doctor could find the cure to cancer? How about the cure to aging? How about if it meant world peace? Youre just being unreasonable to be dismissive. Especially in a roleplaying game, there are plenty of reasons for people to sacrifice their lives for good.True, but a lich can reform?It's a moot point. If he feels bad about it - he still needs to be destroyed. (Not that I'd believe him anyway.)
If a serial killer suddenly feels bad about it - that doesn't mean that he still shouldn't be executed. In fact - if he's truly repentant he should go along with it.
Justice only works if everyone is punished for their actions - not just those who don't feel bad about it afterwards.
What if he got a bunch of willing volunteers who knew that his research was too important to be wasted and then he used his untold magical powers to bring them all back after.
Is he still unredeemable?
So... he's a cult leader who convinced a bunch of people to drink the Kool-Aid in order to give himself immortality?
Yep. Still evil.
Actually - even in your scenario - it's for the POTENTIAL benefits of his research.
Besides - all of that stuff is already possible in Pathfinder.
So - are you going to head out tomorrow to donate yourself to be experimented upon by medical researcher without morals? He might cure cancer! (probably not - but maybe)
|
|
So youre going to ignore the part where the demon was at deaths door? I suppose its reasonable to believe that a small following of unarmed unarmored and apparently charmed humans would drain 7 or more levels from a succubus.The only reason I believe that killing this succubus is a reasonable course of action is that from the paladin's perspective it's much more likely that she's an immediate threat to innocents than that she is redeemed.Except that, again, he hasnt seen her try to do anything bad to the people, the people around her are recently raised and would likely vouch on that, she was far far too weak to be a threat and he should have been able to see that (being drained from 8+ HD to 1 is probably pretty obvious, and he attacked her before she even had a chance to speak. All of that is pretty solid evidence that something strange is going on here, unless he believed that she had been drained of all her levels by her brainwashed villagers.All he saw was a demon surrounded by adoring innocents.
So - he should have taken some time to investigate while said innocents are within arms reach of the demon?
Because the paladin knows that by glancing at it for a couple seconds?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Thinking about it a drained succubus should radiate a much weaker aura as her effective HD count is lowered.
Yes. because when youre literally about to die from having your soul sucked out, it kind of has some effects on your body.Because the paladin knows that by glancing at it for a couple seconds?So youre going to ignore the part where the demon was at deaths door? I suppose its reasonable to believe that a small following of unarmed unarmored and apparently charmed humans would drain 7 or more levels from a succubus.The only reason I believe that killing this succubus is a reasonable course of action is that from the paladin's perspective it's much more likely that she's an immediate threat to innocents than that she is redeemed.Except that, again, he hasnt seen her try to do anything bad to the people, the people around her are recently raised and would likely vouch on that, she was far far too weak to be a threat and he should have been able to see that (being drained from 8+ HD to 1 is probably pretty obvious, and he attacked her before she even had a chance to speak. All of that is pretty solid evidence that something strange is going on here, unless he believed that she had been drained of all her levels by her brainwashed villagers.All he saw was a demon surrounded by adoring innocents.
So - he should have taken some time to investigate while said innocents are within arms reach of the demon?
do outsiders have souls?
So youre going to ignore the part where the demon was at deaths door? I suppose its reasonable to believe that a small following of unarmed unarmored and apparently charmed humans would drain 7 or more levels from a succubus.
He couldn't know the demon was at deaths' door. Nothing in the rules even hint at negative levels being visible, and we have specific spells for seeing the rough neighborhood of hit points remaining (deathwatch).
Dont know about Pathfinder, but I do know that the Manual of the Planes from D&D says that theyre actually made of their souls, which is why they cant be ressurected. So by that logic, negative levels would actually be taking pieces of her body from her.
do outsiders have souls?
So this could be a perfectly good reason why she was losing abilities like the ability to maintain a human shape.
A pound of flesh indeed...
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Dimensional Anchor is a 4th level spell, wizards get it at level 7. Coincidentally, a Succubus is a CR 7. So the magic is readily available in the party, and if its not should be readily available nearby.
1) You're assuming there's a party. The OP's situation described a lone paladin.
2) You're assuming the party is actually level 7, and not a level 5 or 6 party facing a succubus. I throw APL+2 challenges against my group all the time.
3) You're assuming the party has a wizard, and that at 7th level the wizard would already have Dimemsional Anchor available despite just being able to cast spells of that level.
4) Dimensional Anchor lasts 1 minute/level, which means if you have to so much as travel to the next town over to find a high level cleric, you're back in the "can't take my eyes off her for a second" situation.
5) If you do have a party, you probably have someone more susceptible to Dominate Person than your average paladin.
Oath against fiends paladin s have anchoring aura and other dimensional traps anyways
Yes, but only at level 8. Even if the paladin does have access to that effect, it either allows a will save for every attempt at teleportation (and succubi are fairly strong-willed) or has the same short-duration issue as the dimensional anchor spell, giving you at most about half an hour. And as Gaberlunzie pointed out you're still susceptible to Dominate, Charm, or Suggestion. That's too many potential points of failure for me to feel comfortable requiring that the paladin try to capture a succubus.
How exactly does the succubus plan to tell the villagers to attack the paladin without the paladin noticing? Dominate and Charm both require verbally telling your opponent what to do, as does Suggestion. Succubus are not telepathic so thats out. So the only way is to say "Attack the paladin! No dont!" and hope he buys it.
Succubi are telepathic, range 100ft. Check under Languages. In fact, all demons are telepathic so that's probably something a demon-hunting paladin would know.
Keep in mind also that her dominate is once per day. So to get the whole town she would have to charm, which makes them only friendly to her. When the noble renowned paladin who saved several towns by level 7 shows up, you dont attack him on sight because he says he "just wants to question her a bit to make sure shes legit." Do you attack policemen on sight if they want to take your friends in for questioning?
The renowned paladin who has sworn an oath to slay demons? Yeah, I'd be suspicious about leaving him alone with my demon friend. Probably wouldn't attack the guy but I'd definitely follow him out of town to act as a witness - after all, if he's a renowned paladin he can protect me from any bandits on the road, and it's not like my good friend the succubus would do anything to hurt me.
Finally, if the Succubus teleports away, congrats! Hes saved the town and next time when he sees her he will know shes evil without a doubt and can attack on sight. Well done paladin, managed to beat an encounter and secure knowledge of a targets evil with 1 offer of mercy. If thats not the perfect act of a Paladin I dont know what is.
Teleporting away doesn't mean she won't come back tomorrow to continue exactly what she was just doing.
do outsiders have souls?
Going off memory, outsiders (barring mortal plane native outsiders like aasimars) have souls, but no soul/body duality; they are their soul, hence why they are harder to raise from the dead.
However, nothing even vaguely hints at negative levels being visible. Nothing hints at hit points being visible, even.
He couldn't know the demon was at deaths' door. Nothing in the rules even hint at negative levels being visible, and we have specific spells for seeing the rough neighborhood of hit points remaining (deathwatch).
Thinking about it a drained succubus should radiate a much weaker aura as her effective HD count is lowered.
do outsiders have souls?Going off memory, outsiders (barring mortal plane native outsiders like aasimars) have souls, but no soul/body duality; they are their soul, hence why they are harder to raise from the dead.
However, nothing even vaguely hints at negative levels being visible. Nothing hints at hit points being visible, even.
This is my fault. I forgot to put something in the First post. In this particular case, the effects are definitely visible. The way I'd run a self-sacrificing feat like Ultimate Mercy is that, given how many times the succubus has done it in a day, she by now is barely able to stand, has blood streaming out of her nose, and is in obvious pain. Even through all this she is still trying to raise people from the dead.
I apologize to everyone for leaving this out before. :(
Characters who take negative levels lose HP, skill at arms, non combat skills, spellcasting, resistances, and you seriously think none of that shows on the body?He couldn't know the demon was at deaths' door. Nothing in the rules even hint at negative levels being visible, and we have specific spells for seeing the rough neighborhood of hit points remaining (deathwatch).
So youre going to ignore the part where the demon was at deaths door? I suppose its reasonable to believe that a small following of unarmed unarmored and apparently charmed humans would drain 7 or more levels from a succubus.
Changing alignment can also cause you to lose most of those, given the right circumstances. Is that visible?
There is not a single hint at it being visible. It might be. It might not be. It might be in some cases, like being hit by a vampire, but not in others, such as touching an unholy sword. The rules are completely silent on it.
This is my fault. I forgot to put something in the First post. In this particular case, the effects are definitely visible. The way I'd run a self-sacrificing feat like Ultimate Mercy is that, given how many times the succubus has done it in a day, she by now is barely able to stand, has blood streaming out of her nose, and is in obvious pain.
Good to know, thanks for specifying. While I don't think this changed my stance on it (as succubi are so known for being deceitful, and faking vulnerability wouldn't be surprising in the least) it's still good to know, and if given enough other hints I could see it affecting the outcome.
If the paladin had heard beforehand about a redeemed fiend in the area, or even of the existence of a redeemed succubus, or the villagers tried to stop her, I might have had her fall. But again, those are things that from what I've understood didn't occur in this case.
He couldn't know the demon was at deaths' door. Nothing in the rules even hint at negative levels being visible, and we have specific spells for seeing the rough neighborhood of hit points remaining (deathwatch).Thinking about it a drained succubus should radiate a much weaker aura as her effective HD count is lowered.
Yes, that is true, it would be one step lower than a normal succubus. Hardly a reliable measurement, though, and only visible if spending several rounds, twelve seconds to be precise, looking at the demon while having her guard down as she can't both ready an action and concentrate on the spell.EDIT: Sorry, was wrong about that last part, the SLA allows the paladin to sense the strength of aura immediately. Still, looking at a demon and seeing "yeah, it's evil" is a pretty strong hint, and "it might be a bit less powerfully evil than others of it's kind, or it might trick me" doesn't take that much away from that.