I'd like to be convinced to switch to 2e

[HumbleGamer]

The guards took the priest away in handcuffs, while he kept shouting "NO! YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND! THE TAGS! THEY ARE EVIL!"

I don't know, reading that somehow reminded me of Detective conan when the detective keept accusing somebody of being the murderer, moving on another target when they found out that the other one had an alibi for that.

[Vasyazx]

TriOmegaZero wrote:

Knowledge of religion allows you to identify spell tags? Even on spells with variable tags?

If you have recognize spell feat you will be able to correctly recognize the spell-so i think that you will get full information about it including all it current tags.But i assume that there can be different intepritation of these rule

[TriOmegaZero]

I’m not sure why you would choose to interpret it in such a way that it makes the game unambiguous. Can you post the rules that make you think that in the other thread, so we can stop cluttering this one up?

[Cyouni]

I'll try my hand at discussing stuff with the OP.

2. One reason for backgrounds is to help flavour and give ideas for your character. Think of them as PF1 traits, but where traits were used to game mechanics because some were so much stronger than half a feat, backgrounds are a lot more flexible - to get a specific set of two stats out of it, you have about a 60% chance to get one of those two stats in the possible selections.

3. The problem here is that basically no one ever used the standard array because of how inflexible it was. The standard was usually some form of point buy, and PF2's shines over that by a mile.

4. This is no less true than PF1? I'm not sure how you build a level 5 PF1 character, for instance, without people actually needing a rulebook to know their 3 feats and two rogue talents and weapons and spells and-- Like, please do me a favour: I'll show you a level 15 PF1 character, and you tell me what all the feats and talents do without looking at a rulebook. I spent years and years memorizing random PF1 details, and that didn't stop a player from pulling out a feat I've never heard of before.

7. I'm not sure what you mean by save or suck here, because that's not the definition anyone else has ever used. Aiming for a higher DC meaning you have an issue on failure has always been a thing in Pathfinder. Take a lot at PF1's Acrobatics to jump, for instance: if you aim for DC 20 and hit it, you make the 20 ft jump. If you aim for DC 30 and hit DC 20, you don't make the 20 ft jump - you fail to make the 30 ft jump and fall prone.

8. What are you comparing their damage to? 1d4+4 is going to be better than a shortbow's 1d6, for instance.

9. Utility. Or you can hold onto them for weakness procs if you really want, as you covered in 6.

10. Focus spells replace the 3+Int (or whatever they were) powers that wizards/clerics/oracles/paladins/etc used to have. They're still limited in use compared to cantrips.

11. Did...you not play PF1, the game where you can get over +100 to a roll if you really tried? My level 15 diabolist witch wasn't exactly optimized for it, but she still had a +26 Bluff, +46 with glibness, +6 more vs devils, +30 more to convince people that I was a specific outsider when transformed. Note that adds up to +82 to convince devils that she's a devil if I really felt like it.

12-13. A) see PF1. B) I can literally tell you how most things level straight up off the top of my head because of how consistent it is.

14. This was intended, because PF1 basically made it irrelevant to be a martial character after a certain level because spellcasters were so much more effective at being a thing. Where high level martials were just "hit sword more". A level 10 melee martial is literally supposed to be a character on par with a young red dragon in power, but a PF1 martial doesn't show that, because all they can do is sword a thing next to them and move 5 feet.

15. Let me give you a quick example of my level 14 swashbuckler if that makes you feel better. He has three ways of gaining panache - Aiding an ally, insulting an enemy with Bon Mot, and dodging through with Acrobatics. He has two ways of spending it to attack - Confident Finisher to deal damage even when missing, and Dual Finisher to hit two enemies with two weapons. He has one major defensive tool in Twin Parry, which he can also do a stance for so that it lasts permanently, and can hit an enemy with Riposte when they miss by enough. (He also has some cantrips.) This is actually likely to be more complicated than other martials of the same level. Does that really seem that hard to handle?

[Darksol the Painbringer]

TriOmegaZero wrote:

Knowledge of religion allows you to identify spell tags? Even on spells with variable tags?

Using Recall Knowledge to identify a spell (or Recognize Spell) would tell you what the spell is and what it's mechanics are, so it's really not that big of a barrier to know that Divine Lance is aligned to (one of) the character's/deity's alignment.

It's about as helpful as using it for a Fireball, sure, but saying they can't glean that information from a check isn't that outlandish.

[Darksol the Painbringer]

Rysky wrote:

Darksol the Painbringer wrote:

, otherwise it's just a tag,

Always has been. It’s short hand.

Because it can cover a wide range of motives, morals, and personalities.

This is a combat game, not a philosophical debate squad. If the sheet has Evil on it, they are in some way evil, either they have done something or have evil thoughts and mindset but don’t act on it, or rather don’t act on Good/selfless acts and despise them.

You can be Evil without being the Big Bag or haven’t murdered anyone.

Okay, but then if it is shorthand for a generic tag, why are we being upset if players are using this tactic to rule out characters/NPCs having this tag being among them, or having the opportunity to commit Evil, if that is all it really is: a tag? Claims of badwrongfun aren't really applicable from a simulationist standpoint.

When philosophies dictate what happens in combat, determining how characters should act in such a situation, or the consequences of their actions, I will disagree with this aspect.

As for the latter part, this was the same argument behind "Kill all Goblin Babies," which is hypocritical to state, given I am 99% certain you are against that. You can sit there and say that Goblins aren't the same as fiends or undead, which are inherently evil in the setting, and I agree with that, but those two entities are really the only things that I would ascribe that statement toward. The rest is all determined by actions, as they should be, in which case, until they start killing, us killing them before we understand their intentions makes us no better.

[HumbleGamer]

*tactic* is the new *trying to exploit the system*.

Also, leaving apart the player metagaming in terms of alignment ( "I am right blasting people with divine lance, because I will harm only evil ones" ), let us not forget that any good deity would revoke any power from anybody acting this way, so there shouldn't be any issue to begin with.

Ps: in a very extreme situation a good character might do something similar, but knowing that there's no other solution and that they are wrong ( aka, they'll take the blame and have to atone for their behavior). But shouldn't be never the standard approach ( and afaik, something similar is never part of any AP).

[Jonathan Morgantini]

Removed QUITE a few posts for a variety of things. Please keep things on topic, and don't devolve into personal attacks. I also pulled quotes of those comments to make sure they were gone. There was also a lot of personal information shared that doesn't need to be on a public forum, you are more than welcome to DM each other to continue the conversation.

[Cori Marie]

Vasyazx wrote:

Rysky wrote:

Vasyazx wrote:

Rysky wrote:

“Good alignment/element hurt Evil magic/damage makes characters and story writing not work” is a ridiculous notion, a reaction you made up.

Holy damage is a fantasy staple that exists in numerous stories outside of Tabletop.

Alignment doesn’t work only if you operate on a black and white insanity type of morality that falls under “kill anything Evil, no exceptions”, which P2 does not advocate for.

“fine but since people can’t even agree on what alignment means what half the time”

That is applicable to any system of ethics/morals in a media.

Alignment is short hand, it’s an aesthetic mechanic that help make the game what it is, just like having Classes and Levels. Alignment isn’t the best moral system, its not a bad moral system, it’s A moral system with flavor that a lot of people like.

If you say it prevents a story honestly it’s because you’re using it wrong.

I will say that it cause a lot problem for the story when you can detect main antagonist with one cantrip that available on first level

1) what Cantrip would that be?

2) if it’s detect evil your story just sucks since you apparently have only 1 evil person in the entire setting.

1.Divine lance

2.No he is not the only one obviously but its remove lot of tension in morally ambiguous situation when you can just found out that person is evil by using one spell

If you are throwing Divine Lance at people to detect their alignments, I would immediately rule that you no longer have your divine connection to a good or lawful diety. (if you are using chaos or evil, sure those fit the alignments of doing that action) Casting a damaging spell on someone not knowing if it will damage them is not a good action period.

[Dancing Wind]

Errenor wrote:

Dancing Wind wrote:

The only time anyone needs a copy of a rulebook is if they are creating a character for Organized Play (PFS). In that case, you need a copy (digital or analog) of the Core Rulebook and any other rulebooks you relied on for aspects of that character.

And... this is not true. At least in part about Core Rulebook:

"Ownership of the Core Sources is not required for Character Option use in the Pathfinder Society campaign, as long as rules are referenced from the official Pathfinder Resource Document (prd). The Core Sources currently are: the Pathfinder Core Rulebook, Pathfinder Bestiary, and Lost Omens World Guide"
https://paizo.com/pathfindersociety/characteroptions
And you can do a lot with just the CRB.

Thanks for the correction. Makes the OP's argument even less relevant.

[Perpdepog]

Now I'm going to make a villain who uses Divine Lance on everyone. "Only those of evil alignment are harmed by the power of my god. The innocent have nothing to fear."
*ZAP*
"This city, I swear. Not an innocent to be found..."

[HumbleGamer]

Perpdepog wrote:

Now I'm going to make a villain who uses Divine Lance on everyone. "Only those of evil alignment are harmed by the power of my god. The innocent have nothing to fear."

*ZAP*
"This city, I swear. Not an innocent to be found..."

Zap brannigan

"Kif, I found the villain. Inform the crew"

[Deriven Firelion]

Killing or harming an evil person who has done no crime or anything deserving of being harmed is an evil act itself. If you go around randomly blasting people who may have an evil heart, but have not acted upon it yet is a good way for you to end up evil.

You can have an evil person in a game who hasn't done a single evil act. He's just a very hateful, cruel person inside, but is too cowardly to act on the impulses.

Also most deities in these games aren't supportive of wiping everyone of evil alignment out. So abusing their power in such a fashion would not be looked upon well.

Using Divine Lance as a method of detecting evil definitely would not be part of the doctrine of many good deities, especially like Sarenrae who seeks to redeem evil or Iomedae who is also lawful.

There are more alignments in the world than good and evil. Deities have specific doctrines on how to counter and deal with evil and it's not, "Kill all evil in the world." So a lunatic engaged in that behavior would likely not be looked upon well at all. I doubt he would stay good too long.

[Vasyazx]

Deriven Firelion wrote:

Killing or harming an evil person who has done no crime or anything deserving of being harmed is an evil act itself. If you go around randomly blasting people who may have an evil heart, but have not acted upon it yet is a good way for you to end up evil.

You can have an evil person in a game who hasn't done a single evil act. He's just a very hateful, cruel person inside, but is too cowardly to act on the impulses.

Also most deities in these games aren't supportive of wiping everyone of evil alignment out. So abusing their power in such a fashion would not be looked upon well.

Using Divine Lance as a method of detecting evil definitely would not be part of the doctrine of many good deities, especially like Sarenrae who seeks to redeem evil or Iomedae who is also lawful.

There are more alignments in the world than good and evil. Deities have specific doctrines on how to counter and deal with evil and it's not, "Kill all evil in the world." So a lunatic engaged in that behavior would likely not be looked upon well at all. I doubt he would stay good too long.

I found funny that you think that my argument for divine lance usage is to kill all evil even trough i specifcaly stated ways to make it least harmful for any ponetinal target.Anyway i dont think that any priest would just throw that cantrip around for no reason i am just pointed out if there is sutiation that call for it use there no way for target to evade detection

[CorvusMask]

I mean using divine lance in that way is almost same as using dagger with authorized rune for same purpose :P(for reference, when person without authorization touches weapon, it sprouts spikes to impale the hand. Authorization can include specific alignments)

Namely point is, its not "Let me nick little bit blood from you to see if you are evil"(which already sounds like very dogmatic), its "Let me throw this energy javelin at you and if you almost die, you are evil!". 1d4+4 might not be much to pcs, but that is already half the hp of average commoner before you crit them :p

You are speaking of equivalent of "this is holy gun, let me shoot with you, if you survive, you aren't evil" in setting wise.

Like, only context that would make sense in setting is if you are Vildeis worshiper and then you would likely get thrown to jail. Heck you can't know for sure that if you are looking for murderer that they even are evil aligned.

[Deriven Firelion]

Vasyazx wrote:

Deriven Firelion wrote:

Killing or harming an evil person who has done no crime or anything deserving of being harmed is an evil act itself. If you go around randomly blasting people who may have an evil heart, but have not acted upon it yet is a good way for you to end up evil.

You can have an evil person in a game who hasn't done a single evil act. He's just a very hateful, cruel person inside, but is too cowardly to act on the impulses.

Also most deities in these games aren't supportive of wiping everyone of evil alignment out. So abusing their power in such a fashion would not be looked upon well.

Using Divine Lance as a method of detecting evil definitely would not be part of the doctrine of many good deities, especially like Sarenrae who seeks to redeem evil or Iomedae who is also lawful.

There are more alignments in the world than good and evil. Deities have specific doctrines on how to counter and deal with evil and it's not, "Kill all evil in the world." So a lunatic engaged in that behavior would likely not be looked upon well at all. I doubt he would stay good too long.

I found funny that you think that my argument for divine lance usage is to kill all evil even trough i specifcaly stated ways to make it least harmful for any ponetinal target.Anyway i dont think that any priest would just throw that cantrip around for no reason i am just pointed out if there is sutiation that call for it use there no way for target to evade detection

Detection for what? Why are you detecting them? You have to determine the reason why you're seeking them in the first place.

It can't be, "I'm looking for random evil people. I'll figure out if they've done anything wrong after I hurt them."

[arcady]

Regardless of who brought it up or whatever - a discussion on how to run and play alignment fits in it's own topic rather than a topic on the virtues of PF2E.

If something about alignment changed between PF1E and PF2E - then that would fit in this topic. Personally I don't actually know the answer to that. But I suspect what's being discussed is not it.

[Corsair14]

Its an excellent system. Battles are very fluid and more than just stand there and beat on people. Character creation is a blast using Pathbuilder and I could sit there for hours doing stats for new characters. Theres a ton of options and battles are great with many many DM options to throw off players. I have had players actually retreat and run away an come up with different strategies, something they never had to do in 5e.

[Lord Fyre]

Corsair14 wrote:

Its an excellent system. Battles are very fluid and more than just stand there and beat on people. …

But standing there and beating on people is fun! …oh you mean in game.

[Temperans]

arcady wrote:

Regardless of who brought it up or whatever - a discussion on how to run and play alignment fits in it's own topic rather than a topic on the virtues of PF2E.

If something about alignment changed between PF1E and PF2E - then that would fit in this topic. Personally I don't actually know the answer to that. But I suspect what's being discussed is not it.

What is being discussed is definitely not. The only difference is what I mentioned:

PF1 has aligned damage bypass resistance like having resistance to everything but piercing.
PF2 has alignment damage that makes the same alignment and neutral immune to damage.

Btw a reason for playing PF2, as someone with plenty of cricisms of some stuff is that the nobs for changing the system are easier to see. This of course is good depending on how confortable the GM is with changing some or all of the system.

[Vasyazx]

CorvusMask wrote:

I mean using divine lance in that way is almost same as using dagger with authorized rune for same purpose :P(for reference, when person without authorization touches weapon, it sprouts spikes to impale the hand. Authorization can include specific alignments)

Namely point is, its not "Let me nick little bit blood from you to see if you are evil"(which already sounds like very dogmatic), its "Let me throw this energy javelin at you and if you almost die, you are evil!". 1d4+4 might not be much to pcs, but that is already half the hp of average commoner before you crit them :p

You are speaking of equivalent of "this is holy gun, let me shoot with you, if you survive, you aren't evil" in setting wise.

Like, only context that would make sense in setting is if you are Vildeis worshiper and then you would likely get thrown to jail. Heck you can't know for sure that if you are looking for murderer that they even are evil aligned.

Wand cantrip or scrolls if you want to use first level version of cantrip by raw there is also non-lethal metamagic.For futher safety you give target additional hit points and you course ask their consent before doing anything

[Vasyazx]

Deriven Firelion wrote:

Vasyazx wrote:

Deriven Firelion wrote:

Killing or harming an evil person who has done no crime or anything deserving of being harmed is an evil act itself. If you go around randomly blasting people who may have an evil heart, but have not acted upon it yet is a good way for you to end up evil.

You can have an evil person in a game who hasn't done a single evil act. He's just a very hateful, cruel person inside, but is too cowardly to act on the impulses.

Also most deities in these games aren't supportive of wiping everyone of evil alignment out. So abusing their power in such a fashion would not be looked upon well.

Using Divine Lance as a method of detecting evil definitely would not be part of the doctrine of many good deities, especially like Sarenrae who seeks to redeem evil or Iomedae who is also lawful.

There are more alignments in the world than good and evil. Deities have specific doctrines on how to counter and deal with evil and it's not, "Kill all evil in the world." So a lunatic engaged in that behavior would likely not be looked upon well at all. I doubt he would stay good too long.

I found funny that you think that my argument for divine lance usage is to kill all evil even trough i specifcaly stated ways to make it least harmful for any ponetinal target.Anyway i dont think that any priest would just throw that cantrip around for no reason i am just pointed out if there is sutiation that call for it use there no way for target to evade detection

Detection for what? Why are you detecting them? You have to determine the reason why you're seeking them in the first place.

It can't be, "I'm looking for random evil people. I'll figure out if they've done anything wrong after I hurt them."

I already give example with demon who hiding in army ranks

[HumbleGamer]

Vasyazx wrote:

CorvusMask wrote:

I mean using divine lance in that way is almost same as using dagger with authorized rune for same purpose :P(for reference, when person without authorization touches weapon, it sprouts spikes to impale the hand. Authorization can include specific alignments)

Namely point is, its not "Let me nick little bit blood from you to see if you are evil"(which already sounds like very dogmatic), its "Let me throw this energy javelin at you and if you almost die, you are evil!". 1d4+4 might not be much to pcs, but that is already half the hp of average commoner before you crit them :p

You are speaking of equivalent of "this is holy gun, let me shoot with you, if you survive, you aren't evil" in setting wise.

Like, only context that would make sense in setting is if you are Vildeis worshiper and then you would likely get thrown to jail. Heck you can't know for sure that if you are looking for murderer that they even are evil aligned.

Wand cantrip or scrolls if you want to use first level version of cantrip by raw there is also non-lethal metamagic.For futher safety you give target additional hit points and you course ask their consent before doing anything

There are several issues though:

1) Consider we don't know anything ( afaik ) about how alignmenet damage are visually perceived.

I expect an evil character that you are trying to undercover to also be able to fake/withstand the damage ( a simple deception check, that might trick the heroes ).

2) In addition to this, assuming a large number of people and several evil ones among them, it will just turn into a witch hunt.

No more, no less.

"So, in 30 days we found out that there are 500 evil target out of 5000. What now?"

3) The most important one, your deity approval ( and your character desire no to harm "innocent" people, or go against your deity's edicts/anathema, or even your own alignment ).

No good deity would accept a similar behavior.

"Don't worry my Deity, I am going to harm innocent people just to find the "right" evil one. Plus I won't kill them because I am going to give them temporary HP, using low level scrolls and wands. Finally, those who will be harmed would be evil people, regardless the fact they are currently innocent. They might someday do something bad, so we should show no mercy tothem"

DivineLancer97 has been kicked from the channel by Iomedae for spamming... divine lance spamming...

[CorvusMask]

I mean Vildeis might accept it, but I think all Vildeis followers are prone to getting thrown in jail

[Vasyazx]

HumbleGamer wrote:

Vasyazx wrote:

CorvusMask wrote:

I mean using divine lance in that way is almost same as using dagger with authorized rune for same purpose :P(for reference, when person without authorization touches weapon, it sprouts spikes to impale the hand. Authorization can include specific alignments)

Namely point is, its not "Let me nick little bit blood from you to see if you are evil"(which already sounds like very dogmatic), its "Let me throw this energy javelin at you and if you almost die, you are evil!". 1d4+4 might not be much to pcs, but that is already half the hp of average commoner before you crit them :p

You are speaking of equivalent of "this is holy gun, let me shoot with you, if you survive, you aren't evil" in setting wise.

Like, only context that would make sense in setting is if you are Vildeis worshiper and then you would likely get thrown to jail. Heck you can't know for sure that if you are looking for murderer that they even are evil aligned.

Wand cantrip or scrolls if you want to use first level version of cantrip by raw there is also non-lethal metamagic.For futher safety you give target additional hit points and you course ask their consent before doing anything

There are several issues though:

1) Consider we don't know anything ( afaik ) about how alignmenet damage are visually perceived.

I expect an evil character that you are trying to undercover to also be able to fake/withstand the damage ( a simple deception check, that might trick the heroes ).

2) In addition to this, assuming a large number of people and several evil ones among them, it will just turn into a witch hunt.

No more, no less.

"So, in 30 days we found out that there are 500 evil target out of 5000. What now?"

3) The most important one, your deity approval ( and your character desire no to harm "innocent" people, or go against your deity's edicts/anathema, or even your own alignment ).

No good deity would accept a similar behavior.

"Don't...

1I suppose you can test its visual presentation on acceptable targets like undead

2There is no reason to use it as some sort of mass testing to find out evil people.
3Deity approval of action varies heavily but even ones like Iomedae have approve more questionable things then one i propose

By the we probably should stop

[HumbleGamer]

Vasyazx wrote:

1I suppose you can test its visual presentation on acceptable targets like undead.

If you want to go against how deception works ( in terms of faking anything ), sure.

Or else it's just their deception check against the party perception DC.

Vasyazx wrote:

2There is no reason to use it as some sort of mass testing to find out evil people.

Mass is kinda vague when it comes down to random shooting lances towards several targets.

Even 10 targets would be mass, for a good character random shooting people.

Leaving apart that if within the group there are many evil ones, you won't be able to get anything, apart from being the one who indiscriminately attacked and hurted people who did nothing.

Vasyazx wrote:

3Deity approval of action varies heavy but even ones like Iomedae have approve more questionable things

No good deity would allow any of their cleric/champions to indiscriminately harming innocents.

And no good character would ever think doing so because there's a good chance to spot evil ones.

If you plan to go down that way, a champion has also sense evil.

Go on and make a good character, who serves a good deity, and then start acting like a mad man because they sense evil and it doesn't matter if they harm them because they are evil ( even if they are innocent ).

[Captain Morgan]

Pulling a long con on PCs is generally hard to do well for a lot of reasons. One of them is that your players might always roll a natural 20 to see through the ruse. Using Divine Lance to detect the secret BBEG is unlikely for all the reasons mentioned, but the plotlines it ruins are unreliable anyway.

[Deriven Firelion]

Vasyazx wrote:

Deriven Firelion wrote:

Vasyazx wrote:

Deriven Firelion wrote:

Killing or harming an evil person who has done no crime or anything deserving of being harmed is an evil act itself. If you go around randomly blasting people who may have an evil heart, but have not acted upon it yet is a good way for you to end up evil.

You can have an evil person in a game who hasn't done a single evil act. He's just a very hateful, cruel person inside, but is too cowardly to act on the impulses.

Also most deities in these games aren't supportive of wiping everyone of evil alignment out. So abusing their power in such a fashion would not be looked upon well.

Using Divine Lance as a method of detecting evil definitely would not be part of the doctrine of many good deities, especially like Sarenrae who seeks to redeem evil or Iomedae who is also lawful.

There are more alignments in the world than good and evil. Deities have specific doctrines on how to counter and deal with evil and it's not, "Kill all evil in the world." So a lunatic engaged in that behavior would likely not be looked upon well at all. I doubt he would stay good too long.

I found funny that you think that my argument for divine lance usage is to kill all evil even trough i specifcaly stated ways to make it least harmful for any ponetinal target.Anyway i dont think that any priest would just throw that cantrip around for no reason i am just pointed out if there is sutiation that call for it use there no way for target to evade detection

Detection for what? Why are you detecting them? You have to determine the reason why you're seeking them in the first place.

It can't be, "I'm looking for random evil people. I'll figure out if they've done anything wrong after I hurt them."

I already give example with demon who hiding in army ranks

So you don't have another way to detect that like detect magic? This is your last resort?

[HumbleGamer]

Rysky wrote:

I’m beginning to suspect you don’t understand what “Good” means…

I thought it was more the difference between Good, Evil, Innocent and Culprit, but I am starting to think that too.

Or, to say this better, it seems like considering a fallen hero concept to be equal to a good hero.

For example, a champion who has strayed from their path after loosing somebody important and now protect the city without mercy ( torturing evil characters to extort information, coercing people regardless they are innocent or not, blackmailing, etc... ).

[Vasyazx]

HumbleGamer wrote:

Vasyazx wrote:

1I suppose you can test its visual presentation on acceptable targets like undead.

If you want to go against how deception works ( in terms of faking anything ), sure.

Or else it's just their deception check against the party perception DC.

Vasyazx wrote:

2There is no reason to use it as some sort of mass testing to find out evil people.

Mass is kinda vague when it comes down to random shooting lances towards several targets.

Even 10 targets would be mass, for a good character random shooting people.

Leaving apart that if within the group there are many evil ones, you won't be able to get anything, apart from being the one who indiscriminately attacked and hurted people who did nothing.

Vasyazx wrote:

3Deity approval of action varies heavy but even ones like Iomedae have approve more questionable things

No good deity would allow any of their cleric/champions to indiscriminately harming innocents.

And no good character would ever think doing so because there's a good chance to spot evil ones.

If you plan to go down that way, a champion has also sense evil.

Go on and make a good character, who serves a good deity, and then start acting like a mad man because you sense evil and it doesn't matter if you harm them because they are evil ( even if they are innocent ).

1 Well i agree that its possible to fake it i just say it quite easy to learn how exacly divine lance affect people

2 I suppose you just ignored part where i mention consent
3 *cough*Hulrun *cough*Iomedae inquisitions*cough*buring people sometimes innocent even children*cough* after that Hulrun still remain manage to remain as head leader of all inquisitors in Mendev and have his power remain intact despite his actions until his death

[Vasyazx]

Rysky wrote:

1) so the “heroes” are supposed to keep a horde of undead around to prove their murdermancy is perfectly safe for “good” people and thus should be allowed to be used on them for some reason?

2) … it’s your own scenario.

3) Good deities would not approve of their followers randomly attacking and killing people just to find out if they’re Evil or not.

I’m beginning to suspect you don’t understand what “Good” means…

1 i could just ask my wizard friend to use perefctly legal animate dead spell for that

2 As good as any scenario that were used here
3Where i mention that i would want to randomly attack and murder people?

[Temperans]

Vasyazx wrote:

HumbleGamer wrote:

Vasyazx wrote:

1I suppose you can test its visual presentation on acceptable targets like undead.

If you want to go against how deception works ( in terms of faking anything ), sure.

Or else it's just their deception check against the party perception DC.

Vasyazx wrote:

2There is no reason to use it as some sort of mass testing to find out evil people.

Mass is kinda vague when it comes down to random shooting lances towards several targets.

Even 10 targets would be mass, for a good character random shooting people.

Leaving apart that if within the group there are many evil ones, you won't be able to get anything, apart from being the one who indiscriminately attacked and hurted people who did nothing.

Vasyazx wrote:

3Deity approval of action varies heavy but even ones like Iomedae have approve more questionable things

No good deity would allow any of their cleric/champions to indiscriminately harming innocents.

And no good character would ever think doing so because there's a good chance to spot evil ones.

If you plan to go down that way, a champion has also sense evil.

Go on and make a good character, who serves a good deity, and then start acting like a mad man because you sense evil and it doesn't matter if you harm them because they are evil ( even if they are innocent ).

1 Well i agree that its possible to fake it i just say it quite easy to learn how exacly divine lance affect people

2 I suppose you just ignored part where i mention consent
3 *cough*Hulrun *cough*Iomedae inquisitions*cough*buring people sometimes innocent even children*cough* after that Hulrun still remain manage to remain as head leader of all inquisitors in Mendev and have his power remain intact despite his actions until his death

As bad as that guy was, he was in fact doing his job, even if the way he went about it was the absolute worst: "Although not as tied to the tenets of the deity as a cleric, an inquisitor must still hold such guidelines in high regard, despite that fact she can go against them if it serves the greater good of the faith."

You don't make an inquisitor because you want someone who will follow your rules. You want an inquisitor because they zealots who will blindly follow you, but are not beholden to your rules.

****************

Why do you all keep talking about alignment btw? This is a thread about convincing OP.

Anyways, another reason is that you and your team want to play a hyper strategic game in the same level as a simulated SWAT or NAVY seals team. PF2's very tight math lends and strict actions lends itself very well to that type of strategic play style.

It also makes for a great boardgame analog.

[Vasyazx]

Deriven Firelion wrote:

Vasyazx wrote:

Deriven Firelion wrote:

Vasyazx wrote:

Deriven Firelion wrote:

Killing or harming an evil person who has done no crime or anything deserving of being harmed is an evil act itself. If you go around randomly blasting people who may have an evil heart, but have not acted upon it yet is a good way for you to end up evil.

You can have an evil person in a game who hasn't done a single evil act. He's just a very hateful, cruel person inside, but is too cowardly to act on the impulses.

Also most deities in these games aren't supportive of wiping everyone of evil alignment out. So abusing their power in such a fashion would not be looked upon well.

Using Divine Lance as a method of detecting evil definitely would not be part of the doctrine of many good deities, especially like Sarenrae who seeks to redeem evil or Iomedae who is also lawful.

There are more alignments in the world than good and evil. Deities have specific doctrines on how to counter and deal with evil and it's not, "Kill all evil in the world." So a lunatic engaged in that behavior would likely not be looked upon well at all. I doubt he would stay good too long.

I found funny that you think that my argument for divine lance usage is to kill all evil even trough i specifcaly stated ways to make it least harmful for any ponetinal target.Anyway i dont think that any priest would just throw that cantrip around for no reason i am just pointed out if there is sutiation that call for it use there no way for target to evade detection

Detection for what? Why are you detecting them? You have to determine the reason why you're seeking them in the first place.

It can't be, "I'm looking for random evil people. I'll figure out if they've done anything wrong after I hurt them."

I already give example with demon who hiding in army ranks

So you don't have another way to detect that like detect magic? This is your last resort?

Detect magic is not very useful for that because its ping on any caster or magic item.Anyway process overall is pretty simple people who want to avoid ivestigation over their potential demonhood are go for lance test people that refused to pass test or pinged as evil during it will be investigated

[Vasyazx]

Temperans wrote:

Vasyazx wrote:

HumbleGamer wrote:

Vasyazx wrote:

1I suppose you can test its visual presentation on acceptable targets like undead.

If you want to go against how deception works ( in terms of faking anything ), sure.

Or else it's just their deception check against the party perception DC.

Vasyazx wrote:

2There is no reason to use it as some sort of mass testing to find out evil people.

Mass is kinda vague when it comes down to random shooting lances towards several targets.

Even 10 targets would be mass, for a good character random shooting people.

Leaving apart that if within the group there are many evil ones, you won't be able to get anything, apart from being the one who indiscriminately attacked and hurted people who did nothing.

Vasyazx wrote:

3Deity approval of action varies heavy but even ones like Iomedae have approve more questionable things

No good deity would allow any of their cleric/champions to indiscriminately harming innocents.

And no good character would ever think doing so because there's a good chance to spot evil ones.

If you plan to go down that way, a champion has also sense evil.

Go on and make a good character, who serves a good deity, and then start acting like a mad man because you sense evil and it doesn't matter if you harm them because they are evil ( even if they are innocent ).

1 Well i agree that its possible to fake it i just say it quite easy to learn how exacly divine lance affect people

2 I suppose you just ignored part where i mention consent
3 *cough*Hulrun *cough*Iomedae inquisitions*cough*buring people sometimes innocent even children*cough* after that Hulrun still remain manage to remain as head leader of all inquisitors in Mendev and have his power remain intact despite his actions until his death

As bad as that guy was, he was in fact doing his job, even if the way he went about it was the absolute worst: "Although not as tied to the tenets of the deity as a...

I just use him as example of what noble Iomedae can allow if situation require it and that is far more extreme than anything i proposed

[Rysky]

Vasyazx wrote:

I just use him as example of what noble Iomedae can allow if situation requeire it and that is far more extreme than anything i proposed

You keep overlooking that Hulrun is a VILLIAN.

You can’t use a Villian doing evil acts to claim an evil act is good.

[Vasyazx]

Rysky wrote:

Vasyazx wrote:

Rysky wrote:

1) so the “heroes” are supposed to keep a horde of undead around to prove their murdermancy is perfectly safe for “good” people and thus should be allowed to be used on them for some reason?

2) … it’s your own scenario.

3) Good deities would not approve of their followers randomly attacking and killing people just to find out if they’re Evil or not.

I’m beginning to suspect you don’t understand what “Good” means…

1 i could just ask my wizard friend to use perefctly legal animate dead spell for that

2 As good as any scenario that were used here
3Where i mention that i would want to randomly attack and murder people?

1) who mentioned legality? This is a moral scenario, one that you keep adding to and moving goalposts to justify and it’s making it sillier and sillier.

2) … you don’t even realize what you’re talking about? You bring up that scenario as a justification for this farce, then when people call you on it you say you didn’t bring it up, and are now saying it’s valid. Which is it.

3) This entire conversation. What do you think casting divine lance on random people is?

1 It is also perfectly moral because animate dead spell dont have evil tag

2.Demon spies in army are pretty typical thing in WOTR for example
3 I do not cast divine lance on random people i cast it under specific circumstance with all preparation to make it safe and only if people consent on its usage on them

[Vasyazx]

Rysky wrote:

Vasyazx wrote:

I just use him as example of what noble Iomedae can allow if situation requeire it and that is far more extreme than anything i proposed

You keep overlooking that Hulrun is a VILLIAN.

You can’t use a Villian doing evil acts to claim an evil act is good.

That not the point the point is that Iomedae approved his action and not remove him from position of power his status as antagonist for player kinda irrelevant here

[Rysky]

vasyazx wrote:

1 It is also perfectly moral because animate dead spell dont have evil tag

Debatable, and you’re jumping through a LOT of hoops trying to justify this whole thing.

vasyazx wrote:

2.Demon spies in army are pretty typical thing in WOTR for example

K, you’re just gonna ignore when you straight up lied up above.

vasyazx wrote:

3 I do not cast divine lance on random people i cast it under specific circumstance with all preparation to make it safe and only if people consent on its usage on them

Yeah you’re a psychopath who casts it on random people and then flails about uselessly trying every conceivable way to justify it.

vasyazx wrote:

That not the point the point is that Iomedae approved his action and not remove him from position of power his status as antagonist for player kinda irrelevant here

That’s not how gods work. Hulrun was not a divine outsider servant, his position was a political one. His status as a Villian who committed great evils is very relevant since you’re putting him up on a pedestal to justify your own evil.

[Vasyazx]

Rysky wrote:

vasyazx wrote:

1 It is also perfectly moral because animate dead spell dont have evil tag

Debatable, and you’re jumping through a LOT of hoops trying to justify this whole thing.

vasyazx wrote:

2.Demon spies in army are pretty typical thing in WOTR for example

K, you’re just gonna ignore when you straight up lied up above.

vasyazx wrote:

3 I do not cast divine lance on random people i cast it under specific circumstance with all preparation to make it safe and only if people consent on its usage on them

Yeah you’re a psychopath who casts it on random people and then flails about uselessly trying every conceivable way to justify it.

vasyazx wrote:

That not the point the point is that Iomedae approved his action and not remove him from position of power his status as antagonist for player kinda irrelevant here

That’s not how gods work. Hulrun was not a divine outsider servant, his position was a political one. His status as a Villian who committed great evils is very relevant since you’re putting him up on a pedestal to justify your own evil.

1.Well its up to you to prove its evilness

2.Not sure about what exacly you telling me can you please pointed out
3 i do not cast it on anyone unless they agree to become spell target and even then i specifically make it the way that least harm may given
4 i do not care about that becase he still has autority over part of Iomedae church and thus still has her approval.I also do not justify any of his action

[Vasyazx]

Anyway can we please stop debating alignment here because we currently move to far away from topic.These would be my last post about alignment that i made in these thread

[Mathmuse]

All this talk of how determining that someone's alignment is evil justifies that person's execution as the one and only villain in the campaign, the source of all trouble, cannot work in an extended campaign. Most detective novels have several characters confessing their evil nature, "I would have gladly murdered Mr. Body, but I didn't," but the investigator has to find the true murderer to resolve the story.

Let me discuss evil alignment in a Paizo adventure path. I am running the PF1 Ironfang Invasion adventure path under PF2 rules. It is about a mostly-hobgoblin-and-other-goblins army, the Ironfang Legion, trying to conquer southwest Nirmathas and northwest Molthune to form their own nation Oprak. The default alignment of the hobgoblins is Lawful Evil, because their society is built around the tenets of the goblin hero-god Hadregash, who advocates military culture where conquered people serve as slaves to conquering warriors.

I have not found any PF2 material on Hadregash. The four goblin hero-gods appear to have been dropped from the lore. Good riddance.

In addition, the Ironfang leader General Azaersi is a childhood survivor of the Goblinblood Wars in Isger and absolutely hates humans because of her war experiences. The timeline in Pathfinder Campaign Setting: Lands of Conflict says:

Lands of Conflict, Molthune and Nirmathas Timeline, page 5 wrote:

4697 AR: The Goblinblood Wars ravage Isger for 4 years. The wars’ conclusion in 4701 AR drives many remaining hobgoblins north into the Menador Mountains and Molthune, where the nation begins employing skilled veteran hobgoblins as mercenaries.

The party does not attack the Ironfang Legion because its soldiers are evil. Rather, they attack because they are at war. The Ironfang Legion invaded their home village so that the 1st-level PCs and other refugee village had to hide in the dangerous Fangwood Forest. The party did not need Sense Evil nor Divine Lance to recognize their enemy. Nor did they separate friend from foe by species, since the champion in their party is a goblin herself. Rather, the Ironfang soldiers wear Ironfang Legion insignia on their uniform hide armor and patrol in recognizable formations.

And in my particular campaign the PCs are sympathetic to the Ironfang goals. The hobgoblins had been categorized in Molthune, along with goblins, bugbears, minotaurs, spriggans, gnolls, medusas, and orcs, as "monstrous humanoids" and treated as degenerate third-class outsiders after they earned full citizenship in Molthune through years of military service. None of the PCs are human--a coincidence for the first four PCs and deliberately maintained during character creation for the three newer PCs--so they have no favoritism toward the human majority in Molthune and Nirmathas. What the PCs hate about the Ironfang Legion is their taking of slaves. The party has tried to persuade individual members of the Ironfang Legion to settle peacefully without slaves. Hobgoblin Repral, commander of an Ironfang War Beast Camp and a Chaotic Evil cleric of Lamashtu, was persuaded, because she would never treat her war beasts the way the other hobgoblins treat their slaves.

The Chaotic Evil goddess Lamashtu, knownn as The Demon Queen and the Mother of Monsters, offers a strange contrast in my Ironfang Invasion campaign. When I ran the classic Rise of the Runelords adventure path, the clerics and cultists of Lamashtu were people angry at the world who wanted to see it burn. But in my Ironfang Invasion campaign, the two Chaotic Evil clerics of Lamsahtu, hobgoblin Repral (who had been a ranger in the module as written) and orc Krov Thirdmother (supplemental character from the Nesmian Plains gazeteer in the 1st module), were characterized by their love of monsters and violence rather than by hate. The party allied with them. Note that the party members were Chaotic Neutral and Chaotic Good like most Nirmathi people, so Chaotic Evil without heedless destruction is fairly close to their lifestyle.

The 6th module, Vault of the Onyx Citadel, began with a war council between representative of various nations and factions to finally organize an international response to the Ironfang Invasion. It had representatives from Nirmathas, Molthune, Lastwall, the fey court of Fangwood, the dwarven city of Kraggodan, a trade guild, and I added a representative from Nidal, another adjacent nation. The Nidal representative was evil, of course, but she represented a potential ally, so attacking her for being a Lawful Evil enforcer of evil laws would have been counterproductive.

And finally, when the campaign is over and the Ironfang Legion either surrenders or signs a peace treaty, thousands of Lawful Evil hobgoblin soldiers still remain alive. Does anyone in this forum recommend genocide to deal with their evil alignment? I hope not. The official ending is that Oprak was founded as an independent nation ruled by General Azaersi, stuck holding only some sparsely-inhabited mountains and the vault on the Elemental Plane of Earth and bound by treaty and the international alliance to not conquer any additional territory. The PF2 Lost Omens World Guide does not mention what happened to their slaves, but my players will ensure that no-one remains enslaved in Oprak.

The equation "Evil = Enemy" is untrue. I treat alignment more as a description of temperament and religious allegiance. That is more playable.

And to return to the original topic, downplaying alignment fits Pathfinder 2nd Edition. In PF2 each god has edicts and anathema, which govern their clerics more than mere alignment. Detect Evil is not a spell in PF2. The alignment division of champions is a case where alignment is important, but it was probably necessary for breaking the Lawful-Good-only tradition of paladins. I had not thought much about alignment damage and Divine Lance, because only the goblin champion in my game can deal a few points of good damage, but in retrospect, I consider them mistakes in design. Every game has a few mistakes. PF2 has fewer alignment problems than PF1.

[CorvusMask]

1e inquisitors never made sense anyway with how the setting worked, but I digress.

Anyway, I'mma pretty sure goblin hero-gods re still canon?