So I was pondering on the edicts and anathema of Urgathoa, and I kind of realized Urgathoans given their instructions can actually reach a very unfortunate impasse.
Rare as it might be, Urgathoans can find themselves confronted with an undead looking to kill them. Unfortunately, Urgathoans must protect and not destroy undead, it's outright anathema for them to do otherwise. Urgathoans ARE encouraged to become undead upon death, but not all undead will raise them as one, nor are they allowed to sacrifice their lives, so they can't simply allow it to kill them, that's sacrifical. (Obviously this is to do with existing as long as possible to indulge in your glutton for as long as possible, so you know, not every urgathoan is becoming undead as fast as they can is what I'm taking away from that)
That process has to be basically a voluntary transition presumably, and not as an act of unexpected and forced-upon violence. I wouldn't imagine being killed by an undead and not being raised is going to cause them trouble here, but they have to do SOMETHING to protect themselves until they can get to that point where they can be animated. Or at least, make an earnest attempt to protect their lives.
Most undead are pretty much incapable of being reasonably halted or restrained short of Control Undead (Turn Undead is good only, after all), and that is immensely limiting given any reasonably intelligent undead isn't going to be in the level range to make that a useful method of self defence. Many undead also fight to the 'death', so even attempting to simply beat them into submission is a borderline violation and entirely pointless.
I know this is quite an unlikely scenario, and I may be overthinking it since it is mostly only villains that are Urgathoans, but surely Urgathoa knows not every undead is going to be willing to recognize her flock as potentially helpful allies, since she doesn't even have control over vampires for the most part, and many of them probably don't recognize her as their ancient progenitor. Hell, the one that sparked this thought was the dullahan, since they will stubbornly refuse to change their minds once they have decided a creature must die, so if that is a Urgathoan, that's a really rough situation for them. They really can't win there, and they might be falling if they don't get undeaded as soon as possible. Or at least, they'll at best just hope they can out run a horseman with a hatchet that never tires.
Anyone else got any thoughts about this weird hypothetical that actually might come up every now and again? Is this the evil version of 'the paladin falls'?
Also, does marching mindless undead into battle violate the protection edict? I feel taking control over undead and willingly sending them to battle your foes as cannon fodder is the opposite of protect, but given her followers are necromancers, this may actually be something that happens on occasion.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
One thing I think being missed here is that the text of the Cleric's anathema ability is
If you perform enough acts that are anathema to your deity
Note that it says enough acts rather than an act.
Destroying undead is unfortunate, but a specific instance of an Urgathoan being forced to kill an undead who refuses to compromise with them seems more like an unfortunate happenstance that neither the cleric nor the deity will probably be happy with, but that's it.
It's if the cleric makes it a regular habit, or is going out of their way to kill undead, that they risk potentially losing their powers.
I suppose that does help things. Leeway existing keeps these hypotheticals more grounded, that's for sure.
In the Cleric and the Champion there are lines that go roughly in the direction 'stick to the rules if it's reasonable'
I think it's safe to say that dying at the hands of what you are supposed to protect is not reasonable
(Almost) Every Anathema can be avoided with the right reasoning behind it. (Mostly depending on the deities mindset and the specific circumstances)
If for some reason undead are attempting to kill your Urgathoan antipaladin I would suggest leaving the area while avoiding them. That works okay for non-sentient undead. For sentient undead, if they're after you..running away probably wont work.
In that case, I think you're left with little option other than destroying them. Especially if you try reasoning with them and explain who you are and what you do. If that hasn't dissuaded them introducing them the point bits of whatever weapon you're carrying seems reasonable, even given Ugrathoa's restrictions.
Actually, I think that given the way PF2 ranks edicts/Anathamas, Urgathoa would want you to let sacrifice your life rather than destroy an undead.
Actually, I think that given the way PF2 ranks edicts/Anathamas, Urgathoa would want you to let sacrifice your life rather than destroy an undead.
Maybe, but even a Cleric or Champion doesn't have to follow things perfectly, especially when running into conflicts of edicts/anathemas that you didn't try to set up.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Actually, I think that given the way PF2 ranks edicts/Anathamas, Urgathoa would want you to let sacrifice your life rather than destroy an undead.
Anathema are not listed in order, and one of Urgathoa's is 'sacrifice your life', so you're breaking an anathema either way if it's the undead or you. I'd say picking yourself would be fine with Urgathoa as long as you tried everything short of destroying the undead in question.
You know, maybe I don't understand Urgathoa very well, but I feel like she would get off on seeing her followers squirm in a no-win situation like this. Is it possible this is intentional?
Actually, I think that given the way PF2 ranks edicts/Anathamas, Urgathoa would want you to let sacrifice your life rather than destroy an undead.
Anathema are not ranked, only the champions tenets are
It's only that most deities are more reasonable about their Anathema then UrgathoaYou know, maybe I don't understand Urgathoa very well, but I feel like she would get off on seeing her followers squirm in a no-win situation like this. Is it possible this is intentional?
Well...with Urgathoa that might just be the case...
So my last statement is not completely wrong but Urgathoa f!&@s you over anyway :P
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Judging by Urgathoa's backstory, I would reason that the anathema against sacrificing your life is her top priority. Her entire being exists because she refused to succumb to death, not because she wanted to be a god of undeath. While edicts and anathema aren't ranked, I think there's a reasonable hierarchy for most gods, and some anathema/edicts are a bit less central to their core than others.
Gods pick champions and clerics for a reason. I think even Urgathoa, as dark and nasty as she is, would prefer to keep her chosen--imbued with her power--rather than trade them for a common zombie.
That said, I'd imagine this is also an occasion where Urgathoa would intercede. It isn't RAW, but as a DM if I somehow came across this I would probably make the undead ignore the champion. Not help them, nor ignore the champion's allies (they knew what they signed up for), but having rules for gods granting boons and curses suggests to me that they have at least some interest in what their champions and clerics are doing, moment to moment, and act as a literal deus ex machina to break open Catch-22 situations.
|
The big thing to remember with anathema and edicts is that the Gods aren't stupid, so don't apply their rules like you are.
No single action should make you fall (again, keep it sane. Killing your God's herald or something might be enough). It is wilful negligence and disobedience that makes you fall.
Destroying am undead that attacks you? That's fine. Seeking out the undead and insulting it's mother so it attacks you, in an attempt to fool the gods, not fine.
Smashing a zombie, fine. Finding zombies to smash, not fine.