What to do when a LG character needs to do an evil act


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

1 to 50 of 231 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>

Hey guys

so my players are slowly working through Crown of the Kobold King. My LG War Priest has succumbed to the kiss of a Vargouille.

Now the only solution I can see out of this situation is the Heartripper Blade at the end of the dungeon. But using he has to sacrifice a creature which I would consider an evil act

do you think that using it should have ramifications on his alignment/spells/abilities in some way?


I think it depends on the sacrifice. If the sacrifice is a condemned criminal, then I'd say it's neutral, and while somewhat distasteful probably shouldn't have long term impact on your character's alignment.

Willful sacrifice of an innocent though, that's a liminal act. I would at the very least suggest that the Good part of the character's alignment be changed.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

One evil act does not evil make, his god probably understands and would rather have a powerful mortal weapon on the material plane than punish them when they're in a catch 22, gods have brains and can see context. Especially if the thing he sacrifices isn't good, I mean, the player has killed things before right?

Give him some nightmares about it if you must, nothing more, he isn't playing a Paladin, quite possibly so he doesn't have to deal with 'haha you fall!' b+#!*#%+ that follows that class like a plague.


16 people marked this as a favorite.

Just add a Wand of Cure Disease to the treasure at the end of the adventure. Don't make everything about alignment when there's an easy alternative.

Silver Crusade

7 people marked this as a favorite.
Chromantic Durgon <3 wrote:

One evil act does not evil make, his god probably understands and would rather have a powerful mortal weapon on the material plane than punish them when they're in a catch 22, gods have brains and can see context. Especially if the thing he sacrifices isn't good, I mean, the player has killed things before right?

I disagree. This is a formula for tyranny, oppression, and hubris. "My life is more important than the life of this other sentient because I am a powerful instrument of god's justice!" Not once you murder that sentient for your own benefit you're not.

The solution open to the truly good person is to sacrifice his own life. If he knows he's doomed to become a Vargouille, he could ask his comrades to kill him before he transforms and burn his corpse to ash, then sprinkle the ash with holy water just to be safe.

But also, Grailknight's solution is excellent.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

You've created a straw man I suggested not punishing a player for killing someone evil and in the process saving their own life, and their god not punishing them for it. You've somehow twisted that into a self righteous holy warrior who kills people because his life is more valuable.

Also depending on the god in question fairly sure some would be fine with it. If the war priest is a dwarf of torag then he'd be expected to preserve his own life over that of a potential enemy. Iomadea also has been known to kidnap loyal adventurers and force them to work for her, and Blast them with magic attacks should they refuse. So the whole arrogantly muscling your way through people for the greater good is pretty much canon.

Aside from that a game where you devise a situation where in the player has the choices of

1) let yourself die and then have your friends incinerate you
2) be called an evil tyrant have your alignment switched for one deed, in having your alignment switched lose the faith of your god a lose all your class features

Sounds like a fun and reasonable game.

Continuing this uncompromising line of reason, by putting a wand of cure disease in the loot you show that the abilities of your encounters have no lasting consequence and the DM has a safety net in place in case things go wrong. Verisimilitude destroyed game in pieces.

Obviously I think that attitude is ridiculous but I don't see how you can think dropping items conveniently into people's loot whenever players need it is fine. But you must cruelly enforce character shattering punishments for any alignment deviations. Each to their own of course, you do you.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

How well do you know the player? Would he mind having to atone? It might be a nice roleplaying opportunity where the LG war priest disgraces himself and needs to atone. Maybe not even by using the spell atonement, but by doing some interlude quest to prove themself to their god.
Depending on the god, and since he's not a Paladin, I wouldn't necessarily make them lose powers either. Maybe their god just showing some displeasure in dreams or with signs.

Personally I do not think a sacrifice in that case (with personal gain!) would be a good act, but I wouldn't push them into evil for it. Either a step to a more neutral alignment, or just divine ramifications that can be atoned for.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
supervillan wrote:
I disagree.

Can I at least sacrifice the person that's got the wand?

On a serious note though... Has anyone noticed that the type of 'victim' is never mentioned. It doesn't mention an intelligent, innocent, virgin sacrifice to the evil gods... So why can't you coup de grace the pig you're going to cook for supper? Is it super evil to make bacon?

Silver Crusade

You never place items that a party needs as rewards for successfully completing a quest?


I get the distinct impression you didn't understand my post

Quote:
Obviously I think that attitude is ridiculous

I don't tend to use diseases and curses on players anyway because I find it normally slows players down and takes them way off task to solve what is basically a numerical inconcivence without the gravity and connotations of death. Curing disease sub plots don't really call my name.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Thanks for the replies. I think I agree with you Chromantic Durgon. I don't want my encounters to be meaningless by offering easy solutions. I want the players to feel the consequences of their actions.

I've had a discussion with the player in question and he thinks that having to atone if it comes to that would be fine and make sense and actually think that would be a really cool plot point for his character development or depending on what happens have his character killed by another player so I think I will go down that path

thanks so much for all your help!


2 people marked this as a favorite.
graystone wrote:
supervillan wrote:
I disagree.

Can I at least sacrifice the person that's got the wand?

On a serious note though... Has anyone noticed that the type of 'victim' is never mentioned. It doesn't mention an intelligent, innocent, virgin sacrifice to the evil gods... So why can't you coup de grace the pig you're going to cook for supper? Is it super evil to make bacon?

It is evil if you then don't share that bacon with me.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Can you not get to town or get a cure disease spell in the morning?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Dylan Bailey wrote:
I've had a discussion with the player in question and he thinks that having to atone if it comes to that would be fine and make sense and actually think that would be a really cool plot point for his character development or depending on what happens have his character killed by another player so I think I will go down that path

Why would he have to atone? Is he going out of his way to find a sentient PC race person to kill when a livestock animal works JUST as well. I mean if he WANTS to ritually kill an NPC and then get an atonement he can, but why go through the extra effort?

BigNorseWolf wrote:
Can you not get to town or get a cure disease spell in the morning?

But we HAVE to sacrifice someone don't we? ;)


1 person marked this as a favorite.

only paladins actually need to use atonement and that's only if your playing with the paladins must be lawful good and follow a super restrictive code of conduct


Lady-J wrote:
only paladins actually need to use atonement and that's only if your playing with the paladins must be lawful good and follow a super restrictive code of conduct

Unless he's a warpriest of abadar going all the way to evil is going to cost him his link with his god.


BigNorseWolf wrote:
Lady-J wrote:
only paladins actually need to use atonement and that's only if your playing with the paladins must be lawful good and follow a super restrictive code of conduct
Unless he's a warpriest of abadar going all the way to evil is going to cost him his link with his god.

one act of evil does not shift ones alignment so unless he is sacrificing an entire city he has nothing to worry about


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Not having your alignment shifted doesn't keep you from violating the precepts of your deity.

I say do whatever the player most likes as he seems sensible enough to handle it the right way. You can allow an animal to be sacfificed with no consequences as suggested or make him do a more gruesome and dark sacrifice that would cause him to attone if he is really finding that interesting.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Lady-J wrote:
one act of evil does not shift ones alignment so unless he is sacrificing an entire city he has nothing to worry about

It depends on the act. Blood sacrifice with e magic dagger to an evil god? Yeah, thats like 4 burned orphanages worth of evil.


BigNorseWolf wrote:
Lady-J wrote:
one act of evil does not shift ones alignment so unless he is sacrificing an entire city he has nothing to worry about
It depends on the act. Blood sacrifice with e magic dagger to an evil god? Yeah, thats like 4 burned orphanages worth of evil.

now really its 1 death vs potentially hundreds even thousands of deaths depending on the sizes of the orphanages


1 person marked this as a favorite.

It depends on how you take it.
If you offer someone in sacrifice to an evil god you might be condemning their soul. A doomed soul for eternity might be worse than some lifes taken that are not going to be doomed in the afterlife.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Card Game, Maps, PF Special Edition, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

Disclaimer: I know nothing about the module in question.

You're the GM, part of being the GM is that you can modify things. If you don't want to give a wand or scroll or whatever as an easy out, you could have them try to redeem or destroy the blade. Perhaps doing that in the name of their god pleases said god and they reward their faithful follower with a small token (I.e. removing the ailment).

The Exchange

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
graystone wrote:
On a serious note though... Has anyone noticed that the type of 'victim' is never mentioned. It doesn't mention an intelligent, innocent, virgin sacrifice to the evil gods... So why can't you coup de grace the pig you're going to cook for supper? Is it super evil to make bacon?

By RAW, you're right, though from the description of the Heartripper Blade, it's clear that this is intended to be an evil weapon used for evil sacrifices. And given that you're not only supposed to kill the victim but also

Spoiler:
need to eat the still beating-heart for the remove disease effect to take place
, I actually can't see LG characters do that and keep their alignments. Especially as you're normally not bringing livestock with you to the dungeon.

This said: If you're player is up to the task of atoning for this deed, you could make an interesting story out of it.

Chromatic Durgon <3 wrote:
You've created a straw man I suggested not punishing a player for killing someone evil and in the process saving their own life, and their god not punishing them for it. You've somehow twisted that into a self righteous holy warrior who kills people because his life is more valuable.

It's not as easy though. First, the PCs need to get a hold of that blade. Then they have to find out about it's properties because it involves more than just killing a victim. Oh, and then they need a victim. Which, in case they didn't take some of their opponents prisoner alive, means actively looking out for one (and that under the time constraint caused by the Vargouille's kiss) Which makes it way more close to "murdering a sentient being for your own benefit".


1 person marked this as a favorite.
graystone wrote:
supervillan wrote:
I disagree.

Can I at least sacrifice the person that's got the wand?

On a serious note though... Has anyone noticed that the type of 'victim' is never mentioned. It doesn't mention an intelligent, innocent, virgin sacrifice to the evil gods... So why can't you coup de grace the pig you're going to cook for supper? Is it super evil to make bacon?

Technically if your gonna sacrifice a pig you shouldn't eat it after just burn it up completely otherwise your no strictly sacrificing it your just making breakfast.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Also I'm not that familiar with the scenario but would you allow him to sacrifice an item instead of a person something important to him.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Would it not be possible to get the character back to town and have remove disease cast on them? Even a wand of remove disease? The process takes a few hours to run its course, depending on how close they are to the end they might be able to finish before any real penalties set in.

Unless you as the GM have made it seem like the only option is to make this sacrifice (which I would consider an evil act) then the character doesn't have any need to perform this action.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

I think my LG character would just suffer through and let it fall how it falls.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Companion, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
Claxon wrote:

Would it not be possible to get the character back to town and have remove disease cast on them? Even a wand of remove disease? The process takes a few hours to run its course, depending on how close they are to the end they might be able to finish before any real penalties set in.

Unless you as the GM have made it seem like the only option is to make this sacrifice (which I would consider an evil act) then the character doesn't have any need to perform this action.

Kiss (Su) wrote:
A vargouille can kiss a helpless target by making a successful melee touch attack (this provokes attacks of opportunity). A kissed opponent must succeed on a DC 16 Fortitude save or begin a terrible transformation that changes the creature into a vargouille within 24 hours (and often much sooner; roll 1d6 separately for each phase of the transformation). First, over a period of 1d6 hours, all the victim’s hair falls out. Within another 1d6 hours thereafter, the ears grow into leathery wings, tentacles sprout on the chin and scalp, and the teeth become long, pointed fangs. During the next 1d6 hours, the victim takes Intelligence drain and Charisma drain equal to 1 point per hour (to a minimum of 3). The transformation is complete 1d6 hours thereafter, when the victim’s head breaks free of the body (which promptly dies) and becomes a vargouille. This transformation’s progress is paused by sunlight or any light spell of 3rd level or higher, but stopping the transformation requires remove disease or a similar effect. The transformation is a disease effect. The save DC is Constitution-based and includes a +4 racial bonus.

I actually played a character with partial Vargouillism in a Carrion Crown game.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Rysky wrote:
Claxon wrote:

Would it not be possible to get the character back to town and have remove disease cast on them? Even a wand of remove disease? The process takes a few hours to run its course, depending on how close they are to the end they might be able to finish before any real penalties set in.

Unless you as the GM have made it seem like the only option is to make this sacrifice (which I would consider an evil act) then the character doesn't have any need to perform this action.

Kiss (Su) wrote:
A vargouille can kiss a helpless target by making a successful melee touch attack (this provokes attacks of opportunity). A kissed opponent must succeed on a DC 16 Fortitude save or begin a terrible transformation that changes the creature into a vargouille within 24 hours (and often much sooner; roll 1d6 separately for each phase of the transformation). First, over a period of 1d6 hours, all the victim’s hair falls out. Within another 1d6 hours thereafter, the ears grow into leathery wings, tentacles sprout on the chin and scalp, and the teeth become long, pointed fangs. During the next 1d6 hours, the victim takes Intelligence drain and Charisma drain equal to 1 point per hour (to a minimum of 3). The transformation is complete 1d6 hours thereafter, when the victim’s head breaks free of the body (which promptly dies) and becomes a vargouille. This transformation’s progress is paused by sunlight or any light spell of 3rd level or higher, but stopping the transformation requires remove disease or a similar effect. The transformation is a disease effect. The save DC is Constitution-based and includes a +4 racial bonus.
I actually played a character with partial Vargouillism in a Carrion Crown game.

Hmm guess that scenario wouldn't come up for a paladin since their just immune to disease.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Heck
can't he just cast protection from evil 3 times after he uses it

bring in all the weird alignment rules

The Exchange

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Claxon wrote:
Would it not be possible to get the character back to town and have remove disease cast on them?

Having taken a look at the map, I'm not sure if it is. Given that the party has to conquer what is mostly difficult terrain, chances are that wouldn't make it in the 24 hours they have in the very best case.

Vidmaster wrote:
Technically if your gonna sacrifice a pig you shouldn't eat it after just burn it up completely otherwise your no strictly sacrificing it your just making breakfast.

Historically speaking, sacrificing animals often included eating (parts of) the flesh afterwards. Just take a look at the muslim Eid-al-Adha (Sacrifice feast) where this is the expected practice until today.

Silver Crusade

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Companion, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
Chromantic Durgon <3 wrote:

Heck

can't he just cast protection from evil 3 times after he uses it

bring in all the weird alignment rules

Just because you can meta the f#@# out of your character's alignment doesn't mean your character's deity will forgive them.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Dylan Bailey wrote:

Hey guys

so my players are slowly working through Crown of the Kobold King. My LG War Priest has succumbed to the kiss of a Vargouille.

Now the only solution I can see out of this situation is the Heartripper Blade at the end of the dungeon. But using he has to sacrifice a creature which I would consider an evil act

do you think that using it should have ramifications on his alignment/spells/abilities in some way?

This is what roleplaying is all about. Force your PC to decide to become a monster, sacrifice an innocent creature to save himself at the expense of his beliefs in, or kill himself before he becomes a monster rather than allow any innocents die on his account.

Build the drama. Let the other players have their says. Let them roleplay the scene, 2 of them holding down the sacrifice, one of them pressing the Heartripper into his hand, pleading with him to do it, the party needs him, the world needs him, etc, as he ponders if he will still be someone the world needs as he kills the goodness inside him along with the innocent creature to save his worthless life.

Worthless? Maybe, that is what atonement is for. Or maybe you strip his Warpriest powers forever because he chose to go on living another day and sacrifice the principles he used to say were more important than life itself. Watch him roleplay a character who has fallen from grace, either to descend into deeper evil, or to go on living as best he can the life of a good man, diminished in status, but still a good man. That is what roleplaying is all about.

Or maybe the Warpriest will be pressing the blade into the Barbarian's hand begging he kill him--to Gallagher his head with an Earthbreaker, maybe--before the transformation is complete. Maybe, if your PC sacrifices himself to save others, you can bring him back or save him at the last minute. Classic stuff, but make your PC feel like he lost his character.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Rysky wrote:
Chromantic Durgon <3 wrote:

Heck

can't he just cast protection from evil 3 times after he uses it

bring in all the weird alignment rules

Just because you can meta the f+*% out of your character's alignment doesn't mean your character's deity will forgive them.

Well like I already said I'm pretty sure there are some dietyies out their who would rather you sacrifice someone evil than let yourself die soooo

Would be good to know which god the PC likes.


Rysky wrote:
Kiss (Su) wrote:
A vargouille can kiss a helpless target by making a successful melee touch attack (this provokes attacks of opportunity). A kissed opponent must succeed on a DC 16 Fortitude save or begin a terrible transformation that changes the creature into a vargouille within 24 hours (and often much sooner; roll 1d6 separately for each phase of the transformation). First, over a period of 1d6 hours, all the victim’s hair falls out. Within another 1d6 hours thereafter, the ears grow into leathery wings, tentacles sprout on the chin and scalp, and the teeth become long, pointed fangs. During the next 1d6 hours, the victim takes Intelligence drain and Charisma drain equal to 1 point per hour (to a minimum of 3). The transformation is complete 1d6 hours thereafter, when the victim’s head breaks free of the body (which promptly dies) and becomes a vargouille. This transformation’s progress is paused by sunlight or any light spell of 3rd level or higher, but stopping the transformation requires remove disease or a similar effect. The transformation is a disease effect. The save DC is Constitution-based and includes a +4 racial bonus.
I actually played a character with partial Vargouillism in a Carrion Crown game.

Are you helping to prove my point? Because I think you are. While the party probably doesn't have access to long duration high level light magic, they do likely have access to sunlight.

WormysQueue wrote:
Claxon wrote:
Would it not be possible to get the character back to town and have remove disease cast on them?
Having taken a look at the map, I'm not sure if it is. Given that the party has to conquer what is mostly difficult terrain, chances are that wouldn't make it in the 24 hours they have in the very best case.

Well, keep in mind the disease pauses in sunlight.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Companion, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
Claxon wrote:
Rysky wrote:
Kiss (Su) wrote:
A vargouille can kiss a helpless target by making a successful melee touch attack (this provokes attacks of opportunity). A kissed opponent must succeed on a DC 16 Fortitude save or begin a terrible transformation that changes the creature into a vargouille within 24 hours (and often much sooner; roll 1d6 separately for each phase of the transformation). First, over a period of 1d6 hours, all the victim’s hair falls out. Within another 1d6 hours thereafter, the ears grow into leathery wings, tentacles sprout on the chin and scalp, and the teeth become long, pointed fangs. During the next 1d6 hours, the victim takes Intelligence drain and Charisma drain equal to 1 point per hour (to a minimum of 3). The transformation is complete 1d6 hours thereafter, when the victim’s head breaks free of the body (which promptly dies) and becomes a vargouille. This transformation’s progress is paused by sunlight or any light spell of 3rd level or higher, but stopping the transformation requires remove disease or a similar effect. The transformation is a disease effect. The save DC is Constitution-based and includes a +4 racial bonus.
I actually played a character with partial Vargouillism in a Carrion Crown game.
Are you helping to prove my point? Because I think you are. While the party probably doesn't have access to long duration high level light magic, they do likely have access to sunlight.

Yes, I am. Sorry for not making it clear in the post :3


1 person marked this as a favorite.

To answer the thought though... when a LG character needs to do an evil act, that player should probably think long and hard about the concept. In a homebrew setting, I had my PCs draw from the Deck of Many Things, and the Monk ended up Geas'd by a CE dragon goddess to kill 5 powerful dragons of her brother's brood (I split white/black apart from red/blue/green).

The party then proceeded to go slay dragons. The first dragon was evil, and everything was fine. The third was neutral- they had to physically break into it's lair, as it had sealed itself off for the past three centuries. By the time they got to the fourth, some of the players had their doubts about the dragons alignments. The fourth dragon had no hoard, and was actively defending the village that worshipped it.

Point of the story, was one of the more experience players called the monk submissive to evil. Led to an out of game argument until we explained that that wasn't necessarily a bad thing- but for example, a Paladin would've let himself rot before assisting an evil god. The monk's concept was he needed to survive to rebuild his order. An inquisitor would probably see his own survival is more important than (random heretic B). But a Knight style character, follower of (the romantic concept of) chivalry would probably take his death with honor.

If any of this helps.

The Exchange

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Claxon wrote:
Well, keep in mind the disease pauses in sunlight.

I actually thought about that, but as the party can't move through open areas, I don't think that that argument holds. In Crown of the Kobold King, forests are depicted as dim and mist-laden (pg. 2), so there might not be much sunlight available most of the time.

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber

What I did... (and I GM'ed it twice)

Spoiler:

I placed one scroll of cure disease in the treasure with the remains of the cleric in the room with the three ghouls on the upper level. The bard can tell them about that perhaps the cleric had some scroll against that with him, but he was separated when they escaped.

The group only has so much time to reach that scroll.


WormysQueue wrote:

By RAW, you're right, though from the description of the Heartripper Blade, it's clear that this is intended to be an evil weapon used for evil sacrifices. And given that you're not only supposed to kill the victim but also

It really doesn't matter how it was intended, it only matters how it was made. It quickly removes hearts: this is as useful in killing livestock as it is sacrifices. As to eating the heart... so? Modern people might see it as 'gross', but it's not that uncommon a practice for hunters to eat parts of their kills. Nothing bad would come from it. If it's too 'icky', he can cook it first.

WormysQueue wrote:
I actually can't see LG characters do that and keep their alignments. Especially as you're normally not bringing livestock with you to the dungeon.

Why? What is remotely non-good? I don't remember eating livestock/animals as evil...

As to it being in a dungeon, maybe you don't have a pig right there but there are nothing to hunt around? No deer, bunny, ect to knock out?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I agree eating a heart definitely isn't evil anymore than a steak and kidney pie is...

Now I know some people would say meat is murder but unless it's alignment shifting I don't think that your opinion of meat is relevant.


WormysQueue wrote:
Claxon wrote:
Well, keep in mind the disease pauses in sunlight.
I actually thought about that, but as the party can't move through open areas, I don't think that that argument holds. In Crown of the Kobold King, forests are depicted as dim and mist-laden (pg. 2), so there might not be much sunlight available most of the time.

That could make it difficult.

Regardless, if I were the GM I would simply throw the character a bone and make a scroll or wand of remove disease available.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I don't get it what's the evil act? The Heart ripper blade isn't an evil evil nor is using it (unless such text is missing from it's pfsrd description).

You're just killing a evil creature (presumably as the subject of the CDG is going to be a monster in the dungeon) to benefit yourself. How is that any different then killing monsters for their experience or their loot? You know the core premise of the game.


Character death is a valid option, especially at lower levels. Let the character decide how he will handle it, but one thing that no one has really discussed is how will the rest of the party handle it. Maybe they are ok with his choice or maybe they will no longer want you o associate with him if he goes through with it. All choices have consequences.


It's true that the character may just accept death. If the character is noble he might asks his friend to kill him if the time gets to close to when he thinks he might transform to just kill him. Asking his friends to transport the body back to town and beg for a resurrection.

The Exchange

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Firewarrior44 wrote:

don't get it what's the evil act? The Heart ripper blade isn't an evil evil nor is using it (unless such text is missing from it's pfsrd description).

You're just killing a evil creature (presumably as the subject of the CDG is going to be a monster in the dungeon) to benefit yourself. How is that any different then killing monsters for their experience or their loot? You know the core premise of the game.

Well, depends on the interpretation. The description uses words like "baleful" and "blasphemous", which are terms you normally not use in a non-evil context. Also it grants those powers "when used in bloody sacrifice". So even when it is possible by RAW, it's obvious that it isn't intended to be used as a simple +1 weapon in combat or for animal sacrifices.

So we're not talking about hunting animals here. We're talking about hunting sentient humanoid beings with the express purpose to murder them in cold blood (you can't even kill them simply in combat, you have to make them helpless before so as to be able to do a CDG. And all that to eat their still-beating heart to save yourself (and we're not talking self-defense here).

So if you you want to tell me that a lawful good character can do all this with no consequences (because, you know, the core premise of the game), then we have very different perspectives on what the core premise of the game is (little hint: to me, it's not: "Kick in the door, kill the monsters and loot the treasure.")


2 people marked this as a favorite.
WormysQueue wrote:
Firewarrior44 wrote:

don't get it what's the evil act? The Heart ripper blade isn't an evil evil nor is using it (unless such text is missing from it's pfsrd description).

You're just killing a evil creature (presumably as the subject of the CDG is going to be a monster in the dungeon) to benefit yourself. How is that any different then killing monsters for their experience or their loot? You know the core premise of the game.

Well, depends on the interpretation. The description uses words like "baleful" and "blasphemous", which are terms you normally not use in a non-evil context. Also it grants those powers "when used in bloody sacrifice". So even when it is possible by RAW, it's obvious that it isn't intended to be used as a simple +1 weapon in combat or for animal sacrifices.

So we're not talking about hunting animals here. We're talking about hunting sentient humanoid beings with the express purpose to murder them in cold blood (you can't even kill them simply in combat, you have to make them helpless before so as to be able to do a CDG. And all that to eat their still-beating heart to save yourself (and we're not talking self-defense here).

So if you you want to tell me that a lawful good character can do all this with no consequences (because, you know, the core premise of the game), then we have very different perspectives on what the core premise of the game is (little hint: to me, it's not: "Kick in the door, kill the monsters and loot the treasure.")

A lawful good character can kill evil creatures without repercussion, yes. They can also take all their things without repercussion. At least moral repercussion.

At least one guaranteed repercussion is that you get better at killing evil creatures (and creatures in general but for this example the party is good aligned) via additional powers and abilities and loot. The majority of which designed to kill, and subdue threats with violence and force.

I reject the premise that that's not the core game-play that's Incentivized by the Pathfidner system.

Anyways back to the dagger:

  • The dagger makes no mention of sentient beings

  • The dagger makes no mention of humanoid beings

  • Coup de Gracing a helpless foe is not an evil act

  • The healing ability does not include the words blasphemous

  • As previously pointed out by others sacrifice does not mean evil

  • And also killing monsters is not an evil act especially if done for the purpose of preserving a life of a good creature.

    So i see no reason why using it to heal should be an issue.

    Question is using Dragonhide armor also evil? It's the fashioned skin of a once sentient creature after all.


  • 2 people marked this as a favorite.

    Pretty sure ragatheil has killed evil beings in cold blood before and probably would eat their still beating heart to save him from death. Vildeas totally would.

    Also you're inventing to support your argument nothing about the language in the dagger implies it must be a sentient humanoid.

    Also look at the spells used to create the dagger with craft arms an armour, none of the spells are evil.


    Also if you think about it The healing powers of the most powerful Lawful good Paladins and Clerics is cultivated from the blood of countless slain evil beings (EXP).

    1 to 50 of 231 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>
    Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / What to do when a LG character needs to do an evil act All Messageboards

    Want to post a reply? Sign in.