| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Quite honestly, it would be because Paizo already had two NE gods, and didn't want to crowd the space.
Considering he basically setup the government of Nidal and continues to be the source of its power, why does not LE fit him. Nidal is a stable evil nation that seems to have managed to corrupt Cheliax into LE. He imposes his will on other and tolerates no dissent or disagreement. He makes and keeps pacts with others and harshly punishes any who disagree or question his teachings.
Well alignment has died in PF2, but being lawful is more about being orderly and having personal rules, not necessarily about following any external entity's rules that they set.
And as far as breaking the pact Shelyn goes, that was Dou-Bral. The being called Zon-Kuthon is not entirely the same being.
I do think lawful is a little bit of stretch, and NE would have been a better fit, but as noted they already had other NE gods.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Zon-Kunthon’s obedience requires you to have the consent or legally own the subject before causing pain. That seems to keep with a lawful alignment. You cannot simply torture anyone you want to gain the benefit. If he were neutral evil consent or ownership would not be required. If he were chaotic, he would encourage nonconsensual torture.
How someone structures their followers is an important indication of their alignment. Nidal is where most of Zon Kunthon’s followers are located. Nidal is Theocracy under control of Zon Kunthon and his followers. The rules are 3 immortal servants that receive power directly from Zon Kunthon. Despite being thousands of years old the original members are still in control, and no one has challenged their authority. All other organization in Nidal are tied to Zon Kunthon including an order of druids. These organizations are connected and mostly work together even if they do not always agree with everything the other organizations do. Nidal is probably the single most stable government on the world and is definitely LE.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Still a better fit than Findeladlara, the chaotic good god of tradition, community and racism.
Lawful Evil is also the "it is technically legal to do whatever with criminals and chattel" alignment. You could easily frame it so that all of the various victims of the Kuthites various depredations are people who are convicted of crimes by a lawful authority or legally purchased. IIRC from one of the Nidal novels, a lot of the "materials" the Kuthite Initiates work on are slaves legally purchased from Cheliax.
How that works after Cheliax got rid of chattel slavery is unclear, but that hasn't happened yet in 1e.
I would imagine that slavery has been legal in Nidal from its founding. Cheliax may have sold a lot of slaves to Nidal, but they are not the only source.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Well alignment has died in PF2, ...
This is a PF 1E thread. So, alignment still matters.
|
My personal 'Lawful Evil disconnect' is Ardad Lili* who has a 'make promises you have no intention of keeping' vibe going on ('Manipulate others with false promises' is literally an edict for her in PF2e).
I guess her 'use the lust of others against them, but don't be lustful yourself' is disciplined and therefore vaguely lawful, but the whole 'Manipulate others with false promises' really feels more Neutral or even Chaotic to me with its complete lack of honor (actual or imagined).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Well alignment has died in PF2, ...This is a PF 1E thread. So, alignment still matters.
That is honestly very debatable. It only matters because some people still think it matters. PF1 was very workable without alignment. If you didn't have a cleric or Paladin in the party, alignment didn't come up a whole lot in my experience. Of course, everyone's table is different.
That is honestly very debatable. It only matters because some people still think it matters. PF1 was very workable without alignment. If you didn't have a cleric or Paladin in the party, alignment didn't come up a whole lot in my experience. Of course, everyone's table is different.Well alignment has died in PF2, ...This is a PF 1E thread. So, alignment still matters.
Considering casting certain spells either was not possible depending on your alignment - or could actually cause your alignment to shift - alignment most certainly mattered. (not to mention certain items and spells only work/affect certain alignments)...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
At the least, house ruling away class alignment restrictions is a pretty easy thing.
Removing alignment from mechanics is individually not very hard but it’s a lot of small cases. How does smite work? How does protection from evil work? Etc.
At the least, house ruling away class alignment restrictions is a pretty easy thing.
Removing alignment from mechanics is individually not very hard but it’s a lot of small cases. How does smite work? How does protection from evil work? Etc.
Yep, you can keep alignment mattering, by not being willing to make up rulings. But it wasn't hard to say "I don't like this" and make up some straight forward ways to handle a version of PF1 without alignment.
If you're going to play Pathfinder without alignments, just play PF2 and go post in the PF2 threads.
Hard disagree. There's plenty of room to enjoy the mechanics of PF1, without wanting alignment. PF2 is a radically different game (mechanically) from PF1.
If you're going to play Pathfinder without alignments, just play PF2 and go post in the PF2 threads.Hard disagree. There's plenty of room to enjoy the mechanics of PF1, without wanting alignment. PF2 is a radically different game (mechanically) from PF1.
Hard disagree too - IMO Alignment is a fundamental part of the game and it's a shame that it has been removed.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think people are being a little extremist here. Sure alignment is baked into the game but it’s hardly the linchpin the whole experience is based around.
And for as baked in as alignment is, law and chaos have never been meaningfully defined. You can literally do anything and explain it away as being lawful, neutral or chaotic. It’s a pretty worthless axis of alignment.
|
I would prefer no alignment at all. But, as long as it exists, I would also prefer much more focus on law and chaos.
The notion of something law / chaos-centric, like a planar region where devils and archons (allied, but working at opposite ends of the field, to prevent 'friendly fire' incidents...) are under siege by proteans (and, more rarely, qlippoth), as they guard some sort of Axis-adjacent world-sized artifact that is purported to help stabilize a portion of the Maelstrom and allow for Axis itself to even exist, could be funky.
The proteans want this atrocity gone. The lawful outsiders believe that if the 'Engine of Creation' were to be destroyed and reclaimed by the Maelstrom, the Maelstrom would begin to reclaim the rest of the planes, one by one, dissolving them all back into the primal chaos. Axis first, but eventually Heaven and Hell themselves would be eroded away and re-absorbed into the Maelstrom!
The devils and archons don't hang out or anything, and generally stay on opposite sides of the (world sized) engine, to avoid incidents, but they occasionally end up fighting side-by-side.
Just an example of a situation where being lawful would (temporarily, and in this one limited place) be more important than good or evil.
Hard disagree too - IMO Alignment is a fundamental part of the game and it's a shame that it has been removed.If you're going to play Pathfinder without alignments, just play PF2 and go post in the PF2 threads.Hard disagree. There's plenty of room to enjoy the mechanics of PF1, without wanting alignment. PF2 is a radically different game (mechanically) from PF1.
I do actually enjoy alignment, but I don't think it's fundamental and think it being mostly removed from impacting characters is a net positive. Too often alignment was used as a cudgel against others, rather than as a tool for enhancing the game.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
How much of alignment being used against a character is because of a poor GM and how much of it was coded into the game. Except for paladins and to a lesser extent some of the other divine casters, alignment does not have that much of an impact on most classes. The problems that are due to a poor GM should not be held against the game.
How much of alignment being used against a character is because of a poor GM and how much of it was coded into the game. Except for paladins and to a lesser extent some of the other divine casters, alignment does not have that much of an impact on most classes. The problems that are due to a poor GM should not be held against the game.
I agree with you in theory, but I've seen it play our poorly in too many cases to agree in practice.
In many cases, it's not even GMs but players against other players arguing what the character should do based on alignment.
As a GM, I often stated at the beginning of campaigns that I'm not interested in having evil characters because it didn't fit the tone of the campaign, and that if a character slid too far IMO that they would become an NPC. Players mostly policed themselves and would ask me if their actions would cross a line, and occasionally did it anyways knowing the consequences (and then the characters would sometimes come back as a NPC).
More often it would become an argument between players about their good character associating with an evil character that would do X, or about whether the good character would actually do X in the first place.
It's not always the GM that produces the cudgel.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That sounds like a case of poor game etiquette than a rules issue. The only people who should be involved in a discussion about a character’s alignment is the GM and the characters player. Unless the GM is asking for opinions the other players should stay out of it. This is an aspect of rule zero.
That sounds like a case of poor game etiquette than a rules issue. The only people who should be involved in a discussion about a character’s alignment is the GM and the characters player. Unless the GM is asking for opinions the other players should stay out of it. This is an aspect of rule zero.
I don't disagree, but its difficult to enforce.