|
Why wouldn't aasimar take extra damage from 'chaos hammer-esque' spells if they have the appropriate alignment?
They are outsiders after all.
That's one possibility.
People interpret the words "<alignment> outsider" differently.
The other possibility is that an alignment subtype is required.
Darksol's quote earlier highlights why some people (myself included) are in the latter camp.
Contributor
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Also, to save myself some time and effort, a quick link to the last time I had to explain this (complete with its own various citations).
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
a quick link to the last time I had to explain this
Ha! This line made me laugh:
No, I'm sorry but you're just wrong.
While I disagree with your position, I fully admit I could equally be wrong. English is a bothersome language, and Pathfinder isn't written like a manual (though I often wish it was).
Outsiders with alignment subtypes are the embodiment of that alignment. A Demon is a manifestation of Evil and Chaos. By virtue of its nature, it should take more damage from spells such as Order's Wrath.
The Native subtype, in contrast, declares that such creature are not "true outsiders". They have "mortal ancestors or a strong connection to the Material Plane". It would make sense that, since they are not composed of the essence of an alignment, that they would take less damage from effects that target (or are made up of) those alignments.
I like your example of a Paladin smiting an Evil Dragon, though. I am unaware of any [Evil] Dragons. That is certainly more evidence in favor of your interpretation of the phrase "Evil Outsider".
Here's to hoping that Starfinder learns from Pathfinder's mistakes, and at the very least incorporates brackets within their regular sentence structures.
|
Contributor
|
I will say, there is a very strong case for your interpretation being the intended one. And I certainly wouldn't take issue with it as a houserule, nor with it being corrected in a future FAQ or errata. ^_^
If I came off as harsh, I apologize - it's been a rough few days. (And this particular rules argument has become somewhat of a sore spot for me, at least partly due to the conversation linked above.)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Why wouldn't aasimar take extra damage from 'chaos hammer-esque' spells if they have the appropriate alignment?
They are outsiders after all.
That's one possibility.
People interpret the words "<alignment> outsider" differently.
The other possibility is that an alignment subtype is required.
Darksol's quote earlier highlights why some people (myself included) are in the latter camp.
Why would they change the definition of a word from simply [alignment] to [subtype] halfway through a sentence? I can't see any justification for inferring a change of intention.
Especially if we look elsewhere, we know they can draw the distinction such as smite evil where we find "If the target of smite evil is an outsider with the evil subtype, an evil-aligned dragon..."
So while I agree with Kalindlara on most everything here, I can't agree that there is much of a case that it is probably intended that it only applies to [subtype] outsiders.