|
He is useing the druids of uskwood as an example of Druids can torture animals and inflict pain and suffering upon them without losing their powers or not revering nature.
The druids of uskwood only do this against intruders, but that is a second point and irrelevant of the fact that they can and will torture animals and not break the druid code.
No, that's not what the text he quoted says. It specifically and explicitly says the "animal companion" of "rivals". A specific and unambiguous category that does not include wild animals in your area.
And more to the point, what any specific group of druids can do does not open the door for that activity to all druids. Specific trumps general.
Animal companions are still animals...
Kind of strange logic that you aren't supposed to harm animals but an animal in the service of one who reveres nature is fair game to be brutally killed.
Those Druids weren't specific until after the craziness happened. A bunch of completely normal Druids did something that you would say would make them Ex-Druids and are still Druids.
So Paizo believes there are cases where Druids can do things that look like they are not revering nature in one aspect as long as they justify the reasons as revering a different aspect of nature.
I am inclined to believe the developers have a more conducive and enjoyable opinion of what Druids can do than yours.
No no, brutally tortured and meant to suffer for as long as possible. Killed is to nice. We must get our words straight, lest he tries to take them and misconstrued them to suit his own needs.
|
|
To regard OPs post since we have seemed to lose sight of it. He is using the animal because of its high saves. SO he use useing natures powers to help him and his party. Not to be a minesweeper and send it in to die, but rather because it has the best chance of spotting the trap and then avoiding it, and if it triggers the trap it has the most chance at dodging its effect. This is not ceasing to revere nature but rather respecting its powers and knowing its superior to your own and using it.
Another note, This is OPs first post ever and he has yet to comment back in on this. Interesting.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
When things are not defined within the game, then we use the real world definition. For the game to determine whether a druid ceases to revere nature, the GM must use the player's actions. There is no other logical way to do it. There is no other fair way to do it.
1) Moral/philosophical - You argue that if one holds sincere reverence in their heart but acts irreverently then they are irreverent. However, the rules do not address whether the reverence required of druids is in attitude or action. That is your assertion.
On one hand you argue that you must use real world definitions of undefined terms, something I constantly argue myself, but then you outright discount the primary definition of revere which is to FEEL awe or respect toward something. You are simply begging the question.
2) Universality of Respectful Behavior - You argue that because some actions, e.g. a slap in the face, are universally considered irreverent that all actions are, therefore, reverent or irreverent regardless of culture.Wrong. I did not say regardless of culture. Concocting bogus statements and then attributing them to me is bad faith arguing. I explicitly stated that reverent actions are based on one's community.
You accuse me of a strawman while yourself resorting to an equivocation. Community and culture are NOT the same thing. An individual raised according to Muslim cultural traditions in a white Christian community will find certain acts reverent or irreverent based upon his culture not based upon his community.
3) Real World Legal - That the GM should use a legal standard used in real world courts to judge a character's actions. This standard is once again not derived from the rules and in fact cannot be used in a fantasy rpg because it is much more difficult to determine how reasonable people in a world vastly different from our own would reasonably behave.You're entitled to your opinion, but now you're just making stuff up. What's amusing about your attempt at a logical argument is that GMs are required to role play fantastical races throughout the game. GMs are constantly required to determine how NPCs will act given certain situations. Pretending that a GM can't adjudicate how a reasonable druid would act with regard to the forest is simply a transparent attempt on your part to argue for the sake of arguing.
Please refrain from using the word "logic" in any of your responses as you have repeatedly shown that you haven't the slightest grasp of logic in your posts. When fallacies are pointed out you simply resort to more fallacies. Now you are using a strawman of my argument which you just got finished claiming, falsely I might add, I was doing. When the GM plays an NPC race he defines the culture and attitudes of that race. However, when a player creates a character he or she defines the culture and attitudes of the character. The GM is perfectly able to determine how a reasonable druid taught the mainstream druidic faith in say Varisia might reasonably behave. However, that is very different than how my arctic druid raised by a fanatic winter witch in Irrisen might behave. When I tell him my druid hates forests and wants to see them all buried in glacial ice the GM can't just tell me that a reasonable druid would never feel that way. Your argument is nothing but a strawman and ad hominem.
However, that is far less clear when you are talking about goblins and goblin children. Real world standards are not suitable for adjudicating in game actions.Your confusing morals with methods for adjudicating moral behavior. Two completely different discussions.
No they are one and the same, especially in light of the fact that you are the one arguing that whether one has a specific moral code of conduct is entirely adjudicated by whether they meet your specific standard of behavior which you have completely and utterly failed to demonstrate is in anyway objective. Can you even keep your arguments straight throughout a single response? You can't make one claim in one part of a post and then turn and make a different claim when the first is no longer convenient.
|
|
As I said, if you want to ignore the box within which the druid is suppose to operate, that's your prerogative as a GM. The spirit and the letter of the class indicate that mind sweeping with bunnies is not consistent with reverence towards nature for any playable archetype (thought I am excluding Blight Druids from this because that's open to debate).
there is no box, there is no spirit and letter of the class, other then what you interpret and YOUR philosophy on it. YOUR way is not the only way. it is a way, it is a common way. but to completely say that every druid must play this way, ignore those exceptions because they don't count and are weird you cant play like them because they don't fit how i see the game.
this is what you are doing. because you disagree with how i think you should revere nature and my outlook on it you are wrong and i am right. there for you must play how i say because of my narrow minded view on the matter and will not accept any other reverences of nature that do not fit in nice and neatly with mine.
there are millions of ways to revere nature, there are entire druid orders to a specific type of reverences, read up on the green faith and the different druid orders. Druids of the flame will burn down entire forests.
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
Paladins fall but Druids autumn.
Paladins fall but Druids autumn.
You need to come clean my keyboard and monitors. There wasn't a spewage warning anywhere in there!
So, trying to get this thread back a productive direction instead dealing with all the Insane Troll Logic...
We've had a couple interesting examples of different Druid groups that have very different approaches to revering nature. I don't suppose there's a good comprehensive source on the subject of different Pathfinder druid sects? If we want to figure out how Paizo interprets the requirement to revere nature, seeing how they handle it in their own setting seems like a good starting point. Alas, i'm not a Golarion fluff expert (blame it on my longest-running gaming group being big Forgotten Realms fans)
|
|
So, trying to get this thread back a productive direction instead dealing with all the Insane Troll Logic...
We've had a couple interesting examples of different Druid groups that have very different approaches to revering nature. I don't suppose there's a good comprehensive source on the subject of different Pathfinder druid sects? If we want to figure out how Paizo interprets the requirement to revere nature, seeing how they handle it in their own setting seems like a good starting point. Alas, i'm not a Golarion fluff expert (blame it on my longest-running gaming group being big Forgotten Realms fans)
You can probably use some forgotten realms material, James Jacob the creative directive for paizo wrote a lot of the 3.5 stuff as well.
Books though that have a lot of Info about druids in pathinfder:
The worldwwound (The section on the Stonewilds and the Circle of Hieorphants)
Champions of Balance
Inner Sea Gods
Heroes of the Wild
NPC codex (read all the short blurbs for each druid)
The Firesoul Novel is about a Druid of the Flame set in the pathfinder world
Forgotten realm druid books that focus on druids:
The Moonshae Trilogy
The Druidhome Trilogy
Adventure paths and modules are also a good spot to look
I vaguely remember a goblin druid in a module who was all about killing dogs and horses because he hated them
Also going onto the pathfinderwiki (i perfer this one) and pathfinder.wiki and just search for anything druid related and read through it. click on links to bring you to other posts or areas, it fairly interesting read.
There is a lot more info out there, that's just what i know off the top of my head. Iv done a lot of research into druids and are one of my favorite classes lore wise.
You can probably use some forgotten realms material, James Jacob the creative directive for paizo wrote a lot of the 3.5 stuff as well.
Yeah, going off a quick check of my old 3.5 Forgotten Realms books, the names Sean K. Reynolds, James Jacobs, and Erik Mona show up pretty frequently. Sure, its technically not Pathfinder, but it's not like the Druid underwent a massive conceptual change between 3.5 and Pathfinder; mostly they just toned down the Druid with the new polymorph rules.
|
|
Cats, unlike dogs are an interesting case of self-domestication. There evolution included lowering the normal fear reaction that animals have to humans or other animals. Part of the inherited animal traits may have come from human farmers encouraging cats to stay and hunt rodents by leaving food out for them. This encourages pro-survival instincts which become part of the genetic code. Cats express this today by occasionally leaving dead or wounded prey for their owners.
[tangent] I love cats, but I tend to think of this as a programming issue.
Cat sees bird/mouse/etc. Program one engages 'It moved! Kill it! Eat it!' Cat catches and (possibly) kills said critter. Cat is not hungry, which confuses program one, which is supposed to end with eating said critter.
Program two engages, 'Bring food to babies to teach them to hunt, then eat!' Cat has no babies. Closest thing is that not-cat-creature who opens door for them and leaves a dish of food out for them. So it brings the possibly dead critter to them, because it's the closest thing it has to kittens, and clearly has no idea how to hunt and kill it's own mice/etc. (poor helpless creature!), and so needs to have this half-dead chipmunk...
I think we get 'treats' because the cat has followed it's instincts to their logical conclusion. 'If I didn't kill this because I'm hungry, I'm supposed to bring it home for the ones who haven't learned to hunt for themselves yet...'
Or maybe it just amuses me to think that the cat brings me half-dead critters because it pities my lack of apparent hunting ability and is trying to teach me how to fend for myself. :) [/tangent]
As for a druid using an animal as a trap-springer, there are ways this could be rationalized, such as an area being filled with dangerous old traps, and the druid picking an animal that is surplus to the area's ability to support it (or out of it's area, or already old and dying, or whatever) to 'clear out' the traps and make it safer for all the *other* animals in that area. There are lots of reasons why a druid might kill one or more animals, or even purge an entire species from a specific area.
But this does not sound like that sort of thing. This sounds like a druid just using an animal *for his own convenience,* and I'd recommend that the druid spring traps the old fashioned way, by sending the Fighter in and then healing him afterwards. (Or maybe throwing rocks?)
There is a lot to read here. I may have skipped ahead some.
A tree is natural. So is a beaver that cuts down the tree.
Nature is not just Brahma, it is Shiva as well.
You can call it a balance, if you'd like. How would you play a NE druid? They can see themselves as a predator in the natural order. Top of the food chain. They revere the system, the process.
Playing a druid doesn't mean you have to stop and pet a rabbit every time you see one.
EDIT: Typo
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In real life, there are birds that have learned to start forest fires, thus driving out small animals into defenseless clearings to be snatched up by the avian arsonists. These birds do this without any particular care to whether the forest is the kind that benefits from a forest fire or even if it is, if it needs a forest fire at that time. They just burn things to flush prey into the open.
Revere that, druids!
It's not a strawman, it's an exaggeration.
A bear is not nature. Animals and trees are not nature.
They are natural. Just like killing and murder.
You said "You're subscribing to the fallacy that because animals die in nature, then any killing of animals is no different," but some are saying that it's not that animals are killed, but animals kill. With abandon, for fun, and for profit.
The shark shaman flavor text: "Some druids emulate the deadly shark, a remorseless hunter that marine dwellers dread. Like a true shark, a shark shaman leaves blood and fear in her wake.
There is no mechanical rules change to their code of conduct, which means this sort of behavior is acceptable for a normal druid, I'd say.
The point being is that while you espouse your rigid beliefs of druids, Paizo has created several examples of Druids that dont follow that paradigm. Thus proving that Paizo has no issues with Druids who revere specific aspects of nature and forsake other aspects of nature.
Because those factions of druids exist, it can be reasonably inferred that other druids who believe different aspects of nature are of more import exist.
|
It's not a strawman, it's an exaggeration.
A bear is not nature. Animals and trees are not nature.
They are natural. Just like killing and murder.
In the context of the game, nature is synonymous with the natural flora fauna of the druid's local. While humans exist in nature, they are not considered part of it.
Yes, animals in nature kill one another but they don't technically murder one another (except in animated movies). It is irrelevant what animals do to one another. A druid's code isn't based on what animals do to one another.
That is your interpretation, but the actual rule say:
Druids worship (1) personifications of elemental forces, (2) natural powers, or (3) nature itself.
None of those say anything about "the natural flora fauna of the druid's local."
Typically this means devotion to a (1) nature deity, though druids are just as likely to revere (2) vague spirits, (3) animalistic demigods, or even specific (4) awe-inspiring natural wonders.
Again, nothing about "the natural flora fauna of the druid's local."
While we're on the subject of nature-themed deities, what's the selection like in Pathfinder? Any like Malar from the Forgotten Realms that are big on the whole "Nature, red in tooth and claw" philosophy?
The ones that immediately jump out from a quick check of the books are the evil members of the Eldest (the Green Mother and Ragadahn) and the Elemental Lords.
The Elemental Lords would certainly seem like the type to encourage their druids to do things that would be destructive, given Faiths of Corruption talks about how Druids worshipping them have "slipped into madness" and "offer living sacrifices to honor (their) lord’s strength." A druid worshipping the water Elemental Lord would probably cause a huge flood in his honor, because everything is better when it's in water.
Or if you really want an out-there choice for an evil druid, the outer god Shub-Niggurath has druid-suitable domains (animal and plant). Anyone who knows anything about Shub-Niggurath (or the outer gods in general) realizes just how horrible any follower of hers would be, druid or no.
Druid cooks his food and kills thousands of microorganisms, Druid falls.
|
|
While we're on the subject of nature-themed deities, what's the selection like in Pathfinder? Any like Malar from the Forgotten Realms that are big on the whole "Nature, red in tooth and claw" philosophy?
The ones that immediately jump out from a quick check of the books are the evil members of the Eldest (the Green Mother and Ragadahn) and the Elemental Lords.
The Elemental Lords would certainly seem like the type to encourage their druids to do things that would be destructive, given Faiths of Corruption talks about how Druids worshipping them have "slipped into madness" and "offer living sacrifices to honor (their) lord’s strength." A druid worshipping the water Elemental Lord would probably cause a huge flood in his honor, because everything is better when it's in water.
Or if you really want an out-there choice for an evil druid, the outer god Shub-Niggurath has druid-suitable domains (animal and plant). Anyone who knows anything about Shub-Niggurath (or the outer gods in general) realizes just how horrible any follower of hers would be, druid or no.
These are 2 deities for lycanthrobes
Ashava the True Spark is an Empyreal lord of all good lycanthrobesJezelda is the shape-shifting demonic patron of all werewolves and mistress of the moon.
Primary Nature Gods from the inner sea
Erastil nature god of harvest and hunting
Gozreh is a dualistic deity of nature, a god of the storm and sky and also a goddess of the wave and surf.
There is probably more minor deities i didn't read through everything i just did a quick search on what i already knew off the top of my head.
|
|
I will just leave this here as well
Taken from the green faith article in the wrath of the righteous adventure path book 3
The following are the largest orders and their areas of interest and influence.
Druids of the Earth: These priests watch over burrowing creatures, caves, soil, worms, and herd animals.
Druids of the Fang: These priests favor the abilities of predatory beasts, such as lions, snakes, and wolves.
Druids of the Flame: These priests revere fire’s destructive or renewing aspect and nurture burned areas to make sure they support new life.
Druids of the Leaf: These priests revere trees and green plants, and the bounty they provide.
Druids of the Storm: These priests focus on winds, storms, and weather, and are close allies with the Druids of the Wing.
Druids of the Wave: These priests devote themselves to rivers, seas, fish, and other swimming creatures.
Druids of the Wing: These priests watch over winged creatures, both wild and domesticated.
Smaller orders include the
Druids of the Hive: (focusing on bees and wasps),
Druids of the Scarab: (crawling insects),
Druids of the Scale: (dinosaurs, reptiles, and snakes),
Druids of the Spore: (fungi rather than plants),
Druids of the Web: (spiders).
These druids do not worship all aspects of nature they focus on one part of it.
|
|
While we're on the subject of nature-themed deities, what's the selection like in Pathfinder? Any like Malar from the Forgotten Realms that are big on the whole "Nature, red in tooth and claw" philosophy?
The ones that immediately jump out from a quick check of the books are the evil members of the Eldest (the Green Mother and Ragadahn) and the Elemental Lords.
The Elemental Lords would certainly seem like the type to encourage their druids to do things that would be destructive, given Faiths of Corruption talks about how Druids worshipping them have "slipped into madness" and "offer living sacrifices to honor (their) lord’s strength." A druid worshipping the water Elemental Lord would probably cause a huge flood in his honor, because everything is better when it's in water.
Or if you really want an out-there choice for an evil druid, the outer god Shub-Niggurath has druid-suitable domains (animal and plant). Anyone who knows anything about Shub-Niggurath (or the outer gods in general) realizes just how horrible any follower of hers would be, druid or no.
Searching Inner sea goodswith the keyword Druid we find:
Adabar (suggested: urban druid archetype) Yes, the god of civilization and cities
Cayden Cailean: "His priesthood also includes some inquisitors, mainly those questing to free slaves and overturn tyrants, as well as a handful of druids who attend to sacred vineyards and the other agricultural aspects of brewing."
Desna (suggested World walker archetype) "Most of her clergy are clerics, although about one-third of her priests are bards or rogues, with a number of neutral good druids and
rangers also choosing her as their patron." "Priests of Desna—including clerics, bards, rogues, rangers, and occasionally druids—go where they please, earning money by telling fortunes, providing entertainment, and
interpreting dreams."
Erastil "usually serve
communities in places where natural hazards and the weather are their greatest threats, while paladins tend to be leaders in lands where monsters lurk.", "Though druids are a minority among the clergy, all
priests respect them for maintaining the natural world they and their people depend upon."
Gorum (god of war!) "few battle-druids are part of the clergy, however, lending an animalistic perspective and unusual spells to the church’s battle-repertoire." [I recall comments about them being able to use metal armor, but haven't found the relevant rule]
Gozreh "Most of Gozreh’s priests are clerics, but about a tenth are druids, with a few rangers (“weather-hunters”) and adepts taking active roles in the priesthood." "Druids of Gozreh are often hermits, rarely seeing other speaking creatures and leaving their refuges only when the goddess calls or a local settlement bribes them to make rain. Most are content to live off the land, sometimes gathering treasures of the sea (such as pearls, coral, and abalone shells), or selling sea ivory or scrimshaw. Some spend their entire lives on boats; others exile themselves to remote islands to commune with their deity." Archetypes:
Aquatic druid (druid) Storm druid (druid)
Irori "The rare druid-priests of Irori help civilized folk reconnect with their natural instincts and extol the emulation of various animals as the most natural way to achieve self-perfection."
Lamashtu (mother of monsters) "Most of her clergy are clerics, though many lesser humanoid clergy are adepts, a small number are rangers, and a handful are corrupted druids." "The cult’s association with ferocious beasts often puts druids and rangers sworn to Lamashtu in prominent roles among cults; among the more primitive, they may be the head priest
or war-leader."
Norgorber "Bookish alchemists, herbalists, and assassins worship him as Blackfingers, and even a few druids and witches are drawn to this aspect’s patronage of poisonous creatures." Archetypes Blight druid (druid)
Sarenrae "Sarenrae’s acceptance of all who strive toward virtue attracts a diverse clergy: clerics, inquisitors, rangers, sundruids,
paladins, monks, and bards are common, as are any spellcasters or warriors who wield magic to defeat evil, bring light and hope to the beleaguered, and aid the sick, poor, and downtrodden."
Achaekek "Clerics of Achaekek may prepare keen senses and negate aroma as 1st-level spells and spider climb as a 2nd-level spell. Druids may prepare murderous command as a 1st level spell."
Ghlaunder "Clerics, druids, and rangers of Ghlaunder, upon first gaining the ability to cast divine spells, may choose to affect vermin instead of animals when using animal oriented spells (such as animal shapes, detect animals or plants, and hide from animals); these spells can no longer be used to affect animals."
Hanspur "Druids of Hanspur may prepare water walk as a 3rd-level spell, and his rangers may prepare water breathing as a 2nd level spell. Most druids and rangers have dire rat animal companions, though some prefer donkey rats, fish, frogs, otters, or swimming snakes."
Plenty of options.
|
|
That is your interpretation, but the actual rule say:It's not my "interpretation"
the physical world and everything in it (such as plants, animals, mountains, oceans, stars, etc.) that is not made by people
: the natural forces that control what happens in the world
Since a druid can't dominate a mountain or the clouds to spring traps, the only things that really matters for the sake of this discussion are animals and plants.
And before someone posts the same ill-conceived response, just because nature does something does not mean a druid can do it. Just because a typhoon randomly wipes out an entire village does not mean a druid is authorized to wipe out a village as a method of revering nature.
Since you used typhoon as an example.
There is a human druid that lives near or in that giant storm by the shackles, he is not a special archetype or in reverence to a specific weird cult, he does relates his beliefs close to that of Gozreh. and he does send storms to small villages on the islands to cause destruction. Just saying. You are 100% wrong with your assessment according to the pazio developers and what they have put forth in their product.
|
|
once a slave, Velun, Level 6 Halfling Druid, escaped with the help of a druid, who went on to train him. Once he felt he had learned all he could, he killed the druid, turning the mentor's wolf animal companion into a cloak. Velun now lives completely off the land, deathly afraid of cities and the slavers he believes lurk around every corner.
Given his extreme paranoia, Velun rarely teams up with any other sentient creatures, and the few times he does, he make sure they have few connections to other people so word of his location won't reach the ears of slavers or other corrupt city folk. Velun tries to stay out of combat, using his creatures to ensure his escape.
So this druid killed his mentors animal companion out of personal gain, and uses animals for his own benefit.
I have made it my mission now to find every druid pazio has published that proves NN wrong. And i love druids and was writing up a document on druids anyway so its a double win for me. This druid can be found in the NPC codex.
|
|
Whenever possible, Yala faces enemies near a precipice, using her air magic to throw her foes from the heights and dash them against the rocks below—a blood offering to the ancient mountains.
A cold and aloof woman. She is obsessed with protecting the purity of her mountain home, but what "angers the stones" is often hard for others to predict.
NN959 are you a player or DM in the campaign with the murderous Druid?
So again, no way is this topic about torture. It is about not being nice to nature (using animals/whether dominated or summoned, to clear traps).
But you only have to revere it not be nice to it.
|
|
I am not grasping at anything, just throwing simple examples at your straight from pazio's books that contradict with statements you have previously made, you choose to ignore that.
Druids can, will and do, use animals and nature for their personal gain, such as sending them to their death so their master, dominator, the more powerful can get away clean, maybe that was not clear enough for you but i did not feel like posting a full story worth of information, just quick bits. Torture is also fine as shown by the druids of uskwood. the druids of uskwood are not a special archtype that have their own rules, they are just their own order of druids, they can be of many archtypes or be just straight druids.
That druid that sends a storm against a village, clever wording on your part with the reverence of nature bit, still destroys nature in that act, wild animals and plant life in the surrounding region is also destroyed from the storm.
Now these druids all have something in common, they are evil. You are stating that druids can be evil but must be good aligned when it comes to nature is 100% wrong. you are the only one here that thinks you are correct, we have all shown many examples of why you are wrong. you are describing a single type of druid, the stereotypical type of druid, stop being narrow minded.
Back to regard OPs question for those who still care. The OPs druid is using the animal not as a minesweeper, he did not say sending the animal in to trigger the trap, he said sending the animal in to detect the trap IE find the trap. they did a little meta gaming and realized the animal had the highest saves / bonus out of everyone so it had the best chance to lead the way safely, and if god forbid the trap goes off the animal had the best chance to avoid / surive out of everyone. this is not worthy of a druid losing his powers in the least bit, this is something a good aliened druid might even do without issue.
Sending the animal in to die on a known trap would be considered evil, but again would not cause the druid to fall.
Another example of a druid
Karuth Firewalker is a truly inspired fire druid—and he is quite possibly insane. A few years ago, a fateful encounter with a prophetic elder fire elemental gave Karuth the impression that, unlike other humans, he has no soul. Rather, inside him rages a core of elemental fire—a fire that must be released, thus conveniently justifying his pyromaniac urges.
Karuth attacks with no warning, laughing maniacally as he burns alive any whom he encounters.
He sets fire to everything: forests, animals, plant creatures, humans, towns, etc. without remorse or reason, he only cares about fire and watching things burn. his reverence is to fire and nothing else. According to your way of thinking this druid is impossible. He is not a special archetype that changes the Druid code as you like to claim for every thing else we have stated he is a straight up base line druid.