Bladebound Magus Black Blade Purpose


Pathfinder Society

Liberty's Edge 3/5

"The blade typically works toward its wielder’s goals, but not always without argument or backlash. Each black blade has a mission, and while sometimes two or more black blades will work in concert, each mission is singular in purpose (the black blade’s mission is usually up to the GM and the needs of the campaign or the adventure, or a GM can determine the weapon’s purpose randomly using Table: Intelligent Item Purpose). Some black blades are very open about their missions, but most are secretive. Certain sages have speculated that an invisible hand or arcane purpose moves these weapons."

So in PFS how does one determine the black blade's purpose?

(1) Does it have no purpose?
(2) Does the player pick the purpose?
(3) Does a random PFS GM pick the purpose and write it on the character sheet?
(4) Does each PFS GM in each scenario pick the purpose--which means the purpose might be somewhat chaotic as it changes from day to day?
(5) Does a PF GM, when the character reaches level 3, have the player roll randomly on the purpose table, and record the result?

Thanks!

Be sure to cite some evidence toward your conclusion. Remember, you are basically in "debate club" here unless you are a developer. You need to justify your answer with quotes from RAW.

4/5

There are no special rules dictated for the Black Blade in PFS and your scenarios 1, 3, 4, and 5 have no precedent.

5/5 5/55/55/5

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Quote:
Be sure to cite some evidence toward your conclusion. Remember, you are basically in "debate club" here unless you are a developer. You need to justify your answer with quotes from RAW.

Nope. We don't.

There is no raw, so you're going to have to live with the DMs decisions. No DM is going to have the right answer (unless one of the devs pops in), but his should give you an overview of some of the common answers you should expect.

Player picks the purpose is the only option i can think of that's practical for the campaign

a) it should be written down on the sheet
b) it should conflict with your character a bit but
c) it shouldn't conflict with the party more than the average paladin or necromancer.

1/5

I believe that John Compton or one of the other developers mentioned in a post some time back running a game where a blade bound magus first played after getting the black blade and working with the player to develop the purpose of the weapon.

That would seem to imply that the player specifies the weapon's purpose in PFS play.

Liberty's Edge 3/5

Jessex wrote:

I believe that John Compton or one of the other developers mentioned in a post some time back running a game where a blade bound magus first played after getting the black blade and working with the player to develop the purpose of the weapon.

That would seem to imply that the player specifies the weapon's purpose in PFS play.

First, I would like to thank: Serisan, Big Norse Wolf, and Jessex for replying to this thread. I appreciate your comments.

Second, do you have a link for the John Compton quote, Jessex?


nennafir wrote:

"

So in PFS how does one determine the black blade's purpose?

(1) Does it have no purpose?
(2) Does the player pick the purpose?
(3) Does a random PFS GM pick the purpose and write it on the character sheet?
(4) Does each PFS GM in each scenario pick the purpose--which means the purpose might be somewhat chaotic as it changes from day to day?
(5) Does a PF GM, when the character reaches level 3, have the player roll randomly on the purpose table, and record the result?

Thanks!

Be sure to cite some evidence toward your conclusion. Remember, you are basically in "debate club" here unless you are a developer. You need to justify your answer with quotes from RAW.

PFS being a network campaign as opposed to a home campaign by necessity, handwaves a lot things... such as the slaying of a devil required to get into the Hellknight PRC, and various friendly contact pre-reqs for others.

For PFS purposes, because you're not operating under the consistent DM/Player arrangement, the black blade purpose is one of those things that get swept under the rug. Because we're not home DM's we're PFS Judges, something very different.

You're not going to find positive evidence because you can't prove negatives that way. The only thing that can be said is that you can go through the ENTIRETY of the published campaign material, i.e. the campaign guide and Additional Resources and you will NOT FIND A SINGLE THING about PFS Judges moderating personal PC background issues including the agenda of the Black Blade. And this is for a basic reason. A Judge and Players will have at the average convention a total of 4 measly hours to get the scenario done. There simply is not the time to go figgly on character specific things like this.

So in essence the player can pick a purpose, or the player can ignore the purpose, because the campaign itself will be doing the latter.

Grand Lodge 1/5

I'd have assumed that a black blade's purpose in PFS would just be "explore, report, co-operate" much as the ronin is for samurai.

5/5 5/55/55/5

ratlord wrote:
I'd have assumed that a black blade's purpose in PFS would just be "explore, report, co-operate" much as the ronin is for samurai.

well, if the blade is a soul of a pathfinder then sure.

Its also possible that you're a shadowlodge type (for the members!) and your sword is a grand lodge type (for the ten!)

Your sword could be an old relative that wants to see you get married and continue the clan, really dislike orcs, be some sort of earth elemental, have the soul of a druid trapped inside (irony*),a former emperor looking to reclaim their lost glory.. pfs doesn't limit the blackblade from it's normal anything goes approach.

*iron y irony

Liberty's Edge 3/5

So in summary:

If I create a CN bladebound magus who uses a whip whose name is "Anarchy" and which has a purpose of "slay lawful", that seems PFS legal to you?

Remember: PFS is an anti-evil campaign. So no evil dudes/dudettes. But an anti-lawful character seems okay, right?

5/5 5/55/55/5

nennafir wrote:

So in summary:

If I create a CN bladebound magus who uses a whip whose name is "Anarchy" and which has a purpose of "slay lawful", that seems PFS legal to you?

Remember: PFS is an anti-evil campaign. So no evil dudes/dudettes. But an anti-lawful character seems okay, right?

Considering you may have to party with paladins I'm going to consider that a really really really really bad idea on the offhand chance it's not illegal for trying to set up PVP


nennafir wrote:

So in summary:

If I create a CN bladebound magus who uses a whip whose name is "Anarchy" and which has a purpose of "slay lawful", that seems PFS legal to you?

Remember: PFS is an anti-evil campaign. So no evil dudes/dudettes. But an anti-lawful character seems okay, right?

All I will tell you that as a PFS Judge, actions by your character have consequences. And if you purposesly disrupt a table, the table will be dequeued. If the table can continue without you, you'll be asked to leave it. Especially if you think you can cheese your way out of the No-PVP rules of the campaign.

The Exchange 4/5 5/5

Quote:
Be sure to cite some evidence toward your conclusion. Remember, you are basically in "debate club" here unless you are a developer. You need to justify your answer with quotes from RAW.
Everything PFS related wrote:
Don't be a jerk.

We can derive the answer from those four words. The GM shouldn't force you to meld your character to her vision of how a character "should" be played. And the next GM shouldn't change things because he has different ideas. So the only option that works is for you to pick a purpose.

However the quote above applies to you equally if not more so. You should not pick a purpose that could be at odds with completing a PFS mission, will be antagonistic to other players, or demands more spotlight time for you.

1/5

BigNorseWolf wrote:
nennafir wrote:

So in summary:

If I create a CN bladebound magus who uses a whip whose name is "Anarchy" and which has a purpose of "slay lawful", that seems PFS legal to you?

Remember: PFS is an anti-evil campaign. So no evil dudes/dudettes. But an anti-lawful character seems okay, right?

Considering you may have to party with paladins I'm going to consider that a really really really really bad idea on the offhand chance it's not illegal for trying to set up PVP

Also every monk ever and substantial numbers of characters that aren't required to be LG or LN but are for reasons of the players.

I'd strongly recommend a more abstract purpose that is unlikely to cause conflict at a PFS table.

BTW I cannot find the link to whichever dev posted about black blades. Searching the forums was not useful.

Liberty's Edge 3/5

To BigNorseWolf and Drahliana Moonrunner: Don't worry, I never pvp at a table. It is a big drag and only causes trouble. Also, it takes freedom away from the players, and I am never for that. This is only about killing lawful NPCs.


nennafir wrote:
To BigNorseWolf and Drahliana Moonrunner: Don't worry, I never pvp at a table. It is a big drag and only causes trouble. Also, it takes freedom away from the players, and I am never for that. This is only about killing lawful NPCs.

To which I say the same three words I tell all players, my personal ABC code. Actions Breed Consequences.

Grand Lodge

nennafir wrote:
To BigNorseWolf and Drahliana Moonrunner: Don't worry, I never pvp at a table. It is a big drag and only causes trouble. Also, it takes freedom away from the players, and I am never for that. This is only about killing lawful NPCs.

Killing a Lawful NPC(or any non hostile NPC) that hasn't provoked combat is an evil act, enough evil acts and you'll have to retire your PFS character. Good luck with being an eye-roll inducing edgelord though.

Liberty's Edge 3/5

http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic-items/intelligent-items#TOC-Table-Intelligent -Item-Purpose

Just take a look at these and suppose I am playing a CN character. They are all pretty disruptive. All of the purposes are basically "Kill the m*therf*cke*rs now!" where only the target changes. I am not trying to stir up controversy, but a CN bladebound character has a surprisingly large chance to want to kill various people. Most choices are "defeat/slay xxx". I am not trying to criticize things here, but pretty much all of the choices are going to disrupt things.

I think the only "harmonius" choice is just to ignore the purpose. This is why I offered it as an option in my original post.

Liberty's Edge 3/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
MassivePauldrons wrote:
nennafir wrote:
To BigNorseWolf and Drahliana Moonrunner: Don't worry, I never pvp at a table. It is a big drag and only causes trouble. Also, it takes freedom away from the players, and I am never for that. This is only about killing lawful NPCs.
Killing a Lawful NPC(or any non hostile NPC) that hasn't provoked combat is an evil act, enough evil acts and you'll have to retire your PFS character. Good luck with being an eye-roll inducing edgelord though.

Luckily I didn't do it...my sword did...I am very peaceful and would never do that...Praise Iomedae!

4/5

nennafir wrote:

So in summary:

If I create a CN bladebound magus who uses a whip whose name is "Anarchy" and which has a purpose of "slay lawful", that seems PFS legal to you?

Remember: PFS is an anti-evil campaign. So no evil dudes/dudettes. But an anti-lawful character seems okay, right?

Legal, yes, but not necessarily compelling as a design choice. Sure, it's on the intelligent item purpose table (albeit "diametrically opposed" and not just an entire axis of the alignment chart), but the fundamental difference between a typical intelligent item and a black blade is that the black blade has "a mission." That seems more involved than what the purpose chart indicates. I would narrow the focus of that mission into something more specific. Lawful divine casters, followers of a specific Lawful deity, Lawful outsiders... something just a smidge more selective than 1/3rd of the population.

5/5 5/55/55/5

nennafir wrote:
To BigNorseWolf and Drahliana Moonrunner: Don't worry, I never pvp at a table. It is a big drag and only causes trouble. Also, it takes freedom away from the players, and I am never for that. This is only about killing lawful NPCs.

As described I don't think your sword knows that.

You may want to try something a little more specific. Like slavers. Maybe the sword has an andoran inside. (dun dun dundun)

Grand Lodge

nennafir wrote:
MassivePauldrons wrote:
nennafir wrote:
To BigNorseWolf and Drahliana Moonrunner: Don't worry, I never pvp at a table. It is a big drag and only causes trouble. Also, it takes freedom away from the players, and I am never for that. This is only about killing lawful NPCs.
Killing a Lawful NPC(or any non hostile NPC) that hasn't provoked combat is an evil act, enough evil acts and you'll have to retire your PFS character. Good luck with being an eye-roll inducing edgelord though.
Luckily I didn't do it...my sword did...I am very peaceful and would never do that...Praise Iomedae!

How many times would this actually occur without you being in control, the blackblade's ego progression is pretty slow presumably you'll make the vast majority of you saves.

Are you going to be informing the DM at every table that your swords purpose to slay lawful creatures and to let you know when a personality conflict my occur. Or are you as the player going to determine when personality conflicts occur.

What happens when you fail an ego check next to lawful venture captain. What happens at the start of the society mission when you're assigned a group with a paladin and a monk you fail your ego check and you sword forces you to remove associates it finds, "distasteful". Can the mission even be completed at that point?

To many problems that don't have clear answer, if I was DMing I'd make the call that for the sake of keeping the session on track your blade has no obvious purpose and move on.

Quote:
the black blade’s mission is usually up to the GM and the needs of the campaign or the adventure, or a GM can determine the weapon’s purpose randomly using Table: Intelligent Item Purpose

4/5

For an example of interesting conflict that won't screw with tables quite so much, I'll bring up my L12 and now retired (unless I decide to play the new seeker ark or Wardens fo the Reborn Forge with him) dwarven blackblade magus Kazmarok Starforger. The character was all about archeological research and learning dwarven history. The blade wanted to go slay some demons. In scenarios involving the Worldwound and reaching Jormundon they worked great together, but in other cases the blade wanted to fight when the character might prefer to let the demon go on it's merry way and then go back to doing research. As a side note, the blackblade got to have some fun conversations with a certain intelligent sword another character was carrying.

Liberty's Edge 3/5

And then, suddenly, he was galloping towards Tanelorn dragging the screaming runesword from its scabbard and brandishing it at the impassive sky, making the horse rear up and lash its hooves in the air, shouting over and over again in a voice full of roaring misery and bitter rage:

"Ah, damn you! Damn you! Damn you! "

But those who heard him-and some might have been the Gods he addressed-knew that it was Elric of Melnibone himself who was truly damned.

Note: It is interesting that the very source material for the bladebound magus has everyone so upset.

5/5 5/55/55/5

No one is upset.

But what may work for a single protagonist point of view story may not work in an organized campaign where you have to deal with other players who can't bash you in the head before your sword can try to take you over and skewer them.

Liberty's Edge 3/5

BigNorseWolf wrote:

No one is upset.

But what may work for a single protagonist point of view story may not work in an organized campaign where you have to deal with other players who can't bash you in the head before your sword can try to take you over and skewer them.

-1 You are actually upset.

Don't worry, a passing grade is still possible.

I just think it is funny that the source material for the bladebound magus is far more disruptive than anything I am suggesting, and yet people are all up in arms against me. Nevertheless, carry on...

1/5 5/5

Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

It did not appear that the consensus was 'up in arms against'.

If anything, to the contrary, there were *cautions* about not being a d-bag, which pretty much apply to any sort of 'special case' scenario.

Truth in Text: Was strongly considering a blade magus/inquisitor follower of Calistria that used a whip, but it was so clunky getting it moving I gave up the project from the *math* side rather than story consideration side.

Might do it in a home campaign sometime, though...

3/5

Why can;t the blades the purpose be explore cooperate report?

1/5 5/5

Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

It'd be amusing if the *blade's* purpose was the mantra of the PFS and the character's modus operandi was murder/death/kill.

"I *really* want to slaughter you right now, but my sword says we have to cooperate. No, I'm not crazy! Doesn't yours talk to you?"

5/5 5/55/55/5

2 people marked this as a favorite.
nennafir wrote:


-1 You are actually upset.

No. I'm tired bored and in pain. The last has nothing to do with you really.

I hate to tell you this but your idea isn't nearly as edgy, button or envelope pushing as you'd like to think. Its a contrived, trite, workaround to the no PVP rule that we've seen for years. People try to get around it with pets, summoned monsters, eidolons, sentient swords, familiars, mind controlling hosiery and cursed items. Players that want to be the only one in the party and force the story to revolve around them are a dime a dozen.

It doesn't work, you can't do it, save yourself the trouble and don't bother trying it.


nennafir wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:

No one is upset.

But what may work for a single protagonist point of view story may not work in an organized campaign where you have to deal with other players who can't bash you in the head before your sword can try to take you over and skewer them.

-1 You are actually upset.

Don't worry, a passing grade is still possible.

I just think it is funny that the source material for the bladebound magus is far more disruptive than anything I am suggesting, and yet people are all up in arms against me. Nevertheless, carry on...

The source material is disruptive IN THE ORIGINAL STORY. Remember, every time Elric fights a significant battle with that sword, it claims one of his friends in the process. He even tries to get rid of the sword by throwing it in the ocean in a fit of rage. Spoiler: It doesn't work.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
nennafir wrote:
MassivePauldrons wrote:
nennafir wrote:
To BigNorseWolf and Drahliana Moonrunner: Don't worry, I never pvp at a table. It is a big drag and only causes trouble. Also, it takes freedom away from the players, and I am never for that. This is only about killing lawful NPCs.
Killing a Lawful NPC(or any non hostile NPC) that hasn't provoked combat is an evil act, enough evil acts and you'll have to retire your PFS character. Good luck with being an eye-roll inducing edgelord though.
Luckily I didn't do it...my sword did...I am very peaceful and would never do that...Praise Iomedae!

No. Your character may be innocent, but it was your decision, as the player controlling both the character and the intelligent weapon.

The "don't be a jerk" rule applies to players, not just characters.

And playing passive-agressive semantic games with rules wording to try and "push boundries" or "be edgy" isn't particularly following the spirit of that.

-j

3/5 5/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I've been considering a black blade Magus for PFS, and the idea of not being in control of my weapon's desires is actually quite exciting to me.

My plan is to hit level 3, and have that scenario's GM witness me roll on the table. Then, they can mark the roll result on the chronicle, followed by their GM signature. Choosing my black blade's purpose seems unfair, and a little less fun.

Naturally, I would do what I can to make sure the character's overall profile from causing too much friction with the other party members. I would also make sure the GM is familiar with my weapon's quirks before the start of each scenario.

Considering fact that the Unchained Summoner lets me play a capitol-E Evil character at the table and I regularly cooperate with Paladins, this doesn't seem like a huge deal.

Liberty's Edge 3/5

"Considering you may have to party with paladins I'm going to consider that a really really really really bad idea on the offhand chance it's not illegal for trying to set up PVP"

" If the table can continue without you, you'll be asked to leave it. Especially if you think you can cheese your way out of the No-PVP rules of the campaign."

"I'd strongly recommend a more abstract purpose that is unlikely to cause conflict at a PFS table."

"To which I say the same three words I tell all players, my personal ABC code. Actions Breed Consequences."

"To which I say the same three words I tell all players, my personal ABC code. Actions Breed Consequences."

"Good luck with being an eye-roll inducing edgelord though."

"To many problems that don't have clear answer, if I was DMing I'd make the call that for the sake of keeping the session on track your blade has no obvious purpose and move on."

"But what may work for a single protagonist point of view story may not work in an organized campaign where you have to deal with other players who can't bash you in the head before your sword can try to take you over and skewer them."

"It did not appear that the consensus was 'up in arms against'."

"It doesn't work, you can't do it, save yourself the trouble and don't bother trying it."

"Spoiler: It doesn't work."

"And playing passive-agressive semantic games with rules wording to try and "push boundries" or "be edgy" isn't particularly following the spirit of that."

BUT ALSO:

"No one is upset."

"It did not appear that the consensus was 'up in arms against'."

CONCLUSION:

Hmmm... "One of these does not look like the other."

https://www.google.com/search?q=one+of+these+does+not+look+like+the+other&a mp;oq=one+of+these+does+not+look+like+the+other&aqs=chrome..69i57.5823j 0j4&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

I am glad everyone is not outraged but is actually outraged.


Rosc wrote:

I've been considering a black blade Magus for PFS, and the idea of not being in control of my weapon's desires is actually quite exciting to me.

My plan is to hit level 3, and have that scenario's GM witness me roll on the table. Then, they can mark the roll result on the chronicle, followed by their GM signature. Choosing my black blade's purpose seems unfair, and a little less fun.

Naturally, I would do what I can to make sure the character's overall profile from causing too much friction with the other party members. I would also make sure the GM is familiar with my weapon's quirks before the start of each scenario.

Considering fact that the Unchained Summoner lets me play a capitol-E Evil character at the table and I regularly cooperate with Paladins, this doesn't seem like a huge deal.

Yeah it is... you're asking for extra special snowflake attention and GM time in what is likely to be a limited time venue.

Home campaigns... go wild, but respect the nature and limitations of network play. One of those limits is that you're NOT allowed to play a Capital, or even lower case Evil PC.


Upset and outraged, no.

Merely mildly annoyed.

-j

3/5

Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
Rosc wrote:

I've been considering a black blade Magus for PFS, and the idea of not being in control of my weapon's desires is actually quite exciting to me.

My plan is to hit level 3, and have that scenario's GM witness me roll on the table. Then, they can mark the roll result on the chronicle, followed by their GM signature. Choosing my black blade's purpose seems unfair, and a little less fun.

Naturally, I would do what I can to make sure the character's overall profile from causing too much friction with the other party members. I would also make sure the GM is familiar with my weapon's quirks before the start of each scenario.

Considering fact that the Unchained Summoner lets me play a capitol-E Evil character at the table and I regularly cooperate with Paladins, this doesn't seem like a huge deal.

Yeah it is... you're asking for extra special snowflake attention and GM time in what is likely to be a limited time venue.

Home campaigns... go wild, but respect the nature and limitations of network play. One of those limits is that you're NOT allowed to play a Capital, or even lower case Evil PC.

As a Dm even for PFS I try to give every player special time for just them. You should have 4 hours to play. If you spend 2 of them talkign about dr who, well then the other players wanting extra attention are not in the wrong.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Finlanderboy wrote:
Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
Rosc wrote:

I've been considering a black blade Magus for PFS, and the idea of not being in control of my weapon's desires is actually quite exciting to me.

My plan is to hit level 3, and have that scenario's GM witness me roll on the table. Then, they can mark the roll result on the chronicle, followed by their GM signature. Choosing my black blade's purpose seems unfair, and a little less fun.

Naturally, I would do what I can to make sure the character's overall profile from causing too much friction with the other party members. I would also make sure the GM is familiar with my weapon's quirks before the start of each scenario.

Considering fact that the Unchained Summoner lets me play a capitol-E Evil character at the table and I regularly cooperate with Paladins, this doesn't seem like a huge deal.

Yeah it is... you're asking for extra special snowflake attention and GM time in what is likely to be a limited time venue.

Home campaigns... go wild, but respect the nature and limitations of network play. One of those limits is that you're NOT allowed to play a Capital, or even lower case Evil PC.

As a Dm even for PFS I try to give every player special time for just them. You should have 4 hours to play. If you spend 2 of them talkign about dr who, well then the other players wanting extra attention are not in the wrong.

When I'm running a convention table, rest assured that that's not going to happen. PFS scenarios as they are, are a challenge to finish in four hours even when players aren't goofinng off and giving their full attention.

And trying to pull an argument that says I should be able to do this because the rest of my table will be goof off jerks, isn't a good way to approach PFS.

3/5

Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
Finlanderboy wrote:
Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
Rosc wrote:

I've been considering a black blade Magus for PFS, and the idea of not being in control of my weapon's desires is actually quite exciting to me.

My plan is to hit level 3, and have that scenario's GM witness me roll on the table. Then, they can mark the roll result on the chronicle, followed by their GM signature. Choosing my black blade's purpose seems unfair, and a little less fun.

Naturally, I would do what I can to make sure the character's overall profile from causing too much friction with the other party members. I would also make sure the GM is familiar with my weapon's quirks before the start of each scenario.

Considering fact that the Unchained Summoner lets me play a capitol-E Evil character at the table and I regularly cooperate with Paladins, this doesn't seem like a huge deal.

Yeah it is... you're asking for extra special snowflake attention and GM time in what is likely to be a limited time venue.

Home campaigns... go wild, but respect the nature and limitations of network play. One of those limits is that you're NOT allowed to play a Capital, or even lower case Evil PC.

As a Dm even for PFS I try to give every player special time for just them. You should have 4 hours to play. If you spend 2 of them talkign about dr who, well then the other players wanting extra attention are not in the wrong.

When I'm running a convention table, rest assured that that's not going to happen. PFS scenarios as they are, are a challenge to finish in four hours even when players aren't goofinng off and giving their full attention.

And trying to pull an argument that says I should be able to do this because the rest of my table will be goof off jerks, isn't a good way to approach PFS.

I am sorry I did not mean this directed at you specifically. It was a general comment that often a DM has extra time to spend. If is spent not playing the game, then those being ignored while you are off topic wanting extra attention are not in the wrong.

3/5 5/5

Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
Rosc wrote:

I've been considering a black blade Magus for PFS, and the idea of not being in control of my weapon's desires is actually quite exciting to me.

My plan is to hit level 3, and have that scenario's GM witness me roll on the table. Then, they can mark the roll result on the chronicle, followed by their GM signature. Choosing my black blade's purpose seems unfair, and a little less fun.

Naturally, I would do what I can to make sure the character's overall profile from causing too much friction with the other party members. I would also make sure the GM is familiar with my weapon's quirks before the start of each scenario.

Considering fact that the Unchained Summoner lets me play a capitol-E Evil character at the table and I regularly cooperate with Paladins, this doesn't seem like a huge deal.

Yeah it is... you're asking for extra special snowflake attention and GM time in what is likely to be a limited time venue.

Home campaigns... go wild, but respect the nature and limitations of network play. One of those limits is that you're NOT allowed to play a Capital, or even lower case Evil PC.

Perhaps I should clarify on the pre-game chat. It's not about demanding extra time, it's about full disclosure of my character's weaknesses that might come up. Just like telling your GM about the Medium's Taboos if you use them, or informing them about a particularly obscure feat combination that your character hinges on. It's better to let them know at the start instead of springing it on them 3 combats in.

And check the U-Summoner. Several Eidolon sybtypes are evil outsiders that are under your control. Your Summoner simply has to be within one alignment step, much like worshipping Urgathoa or Azmodeus. It usually works at tables because the demon is mostly excited about fighting, no matter who it is, and there is no shortage of that in most adventures.

Liberty's Edge 3/5

Rosc wrote:

I've been considering a black blade Magus for PFS, and the idea of not being in control of my weapon's desires is actually quite exciting to me.

My plan is to hit level 3, and have that scenario's GM witness me roll on the table. Then, they can mark the roll result on the chronicle, followed by their GM signature. Choosing my black blade's purpose seems unfair, and a little less fun.

Naturally, I would do what I can to make sure the character's overall profile from causing too much friction with the other party members. I would also make sure the GM is familiar with my weapon's quirks before the start of each scenario.

Considering fact that the Unchained Summoner lets me play a capitol-E Evil character at the table and I regularly cooperate with Paladins, this doesn't seem like a huge deal.

Great post!

Liberty's Edge 3/5

To everyone who has posted in the thread: Thanks for your help! I think I might have been winding you up a bit, but rest assured that in an actual scenario I try not to disrupt things. So I think playing a wacky character is okay, but taking up excessive time and/or derailing the scenario is not okay.

Anyway, thanks for the input.

Grand Lodge 4/5

Jessex wrote:

I believe that John Compton or one of the other developers mentioned in a post some time back running a game where a blade bound magus first played after getting the black blade and working with the player to develop the purpose of the weapon.

That would seem to imply that the player specifies the weapon's purpose in PFS play.

Has anyone located a ruling on the subject? Other discussions:

Black blade's purpose
Black blade and intelligent weapons

The sidebar in Ultimate Magic seems to consider a "purpose" derived from CRB table 15-25 equivalent to the black blade's "mission". I think most of these are playable and have the potential to cause a suitable amount of trouble to a magus.

It should go without saying that a player is responsible for anything that he decides his class feature does or advises him to do, and if not in control (fails a personality conflict and the blade decides on "harsher measures", page 536), edit: the GM specifies how the blade compels the character to act.

PFS rulings have rightly tended to avoid giving random rolls for permanent characteristics.

I might propose:
When a bladebound magus reaches 3rd level, the player must select a purpose from CRB Table 15-25 as the black blade's mission and record it on his character sheet, adding any required details. (The player may use different decision-making methods such as rolling randomly or asking others for advice, as he chooses.) The player must provide the black blade's mission to the GM at the start of each session.

Grand Lodge 4/5

for reference:
Table 15-25: Intelligent Item Purpose

Community / Forums / Organized Play / Pathfinder Society / Bladebound Magus Black Blade Purpose All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in Pathfinder Society