|
as for the corpse issue ... when I had my undead lord my plan was to buy a portable hole ... and stuff the scenario's kills into it ... that way Id always have a source of corpses at my disposal ... I was going to go as far as to write down the "Rare" corpses that she aquired ...
e.g. oh look we killed a small white dragon .... into the hole you go
|
I think the problem that we have is that characters can be evil in everything but name in PFS. Mechanically, using spells with the "Evil" descriptor moves you towards Evil. Ripping out someone's tongue because he displeased your boss is Evil, and were is not for the ruling that characters are not responsible for their own actions in the course of faction missions (except for Paladins...), I would instantly evil out a character for that faction mission.
The game system assumes certain acts are evil. PFS has hand-waved that fact. What we are left with is Good characters playing "Neutral but actually Evil" characters. We need to decide if Evil characters are allowed or not, and quit dancing on the fence.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
My personal rule is as long as everyone is having fun, go nuts. Evil, schmevil. The whole reason we can't play evil characters is the conflict it creates at the table. When players have open minds and appreciate the spirit of shared fun, white/grey/black doesn't matter. Conflict begins when one player's concept of fun intrudes on another player's. That's when everyone needs to be adults and curb the behavior back to neutral. Failure to do so creates acrimony and tension. It downright sucks to be at the table when it's happening. Unfortunately there are players who enjoy creating these situations. These players aren't exclusive to the ones who play evil-leaning characters. I'm in favor of players policing themselves and not trying to add more rules to the Guide. We have seen that players are very adept at working around/exploiting rules.
What really saddens me is when new players come onto the boards and read the bickering on these threads and say to themselves "I'm staying away from this campaign!".
The problem here isn't necromancers, paladins or morality. It's players being selfish. They are unwilling to tone it down so everyone can have fun. You can remove undead use from the game, but that isn't going to fix the selfish player problem.
|
Forget this is a role-playing and race to the end please. This is Pathfinder Society, no characterisation will be allowed. Nothing to see here. Move along.
What I think keeps getting missed here is what the reality of Animate Dead would be like if Pathfinder took place in the real world. I would be as horrific and disrespectful to the body as any crime we have in todays world. Yet because we play in this fantasy world where we can do incredible things, such a crime in considered not evil DESPITE its descriptor. Thats a joke!!!!
Lass makes a great point comparing this to other potential evil acts. If we are cool with letting some weird snowflake concept, which sounds munchkined up to all porportions, do things that in a real world would definately be judged evil by our court system why the hell are we allowing this in our RPG?
Maybe next time someone wants to eat a Harpy heart go ahead. We dont have harpies in our real world so why not? Sure lets torture, murder and other heinous acts because it aint the real...
I understand what you are trying to say, but you are missing the point that certain things have to be handwaived for games like this to function.
You want to put real life into this game? Fine. Let's make some changes.
All characters are immediately moved to the highest tax bracket IRL (so someplace between 33% and 40% (maybe more or less depending on what country you live in) of your gold is gone before you even get it.
The authorities will question you kill and intelligent creature in their jurisdiction, regardless of race/species (equal rights for all, even monsters), and you could even get sent to prison, despite you possibly having just cause.
Anyone you dont actually kill is going to come after you with a lawsuit which will end up with your character in the poor house after you lose, cause you assaulted the npc and have caused undue hardship on their ability to earn a living.
The point is that yes, necromancy would be morally incomprehensible IRL, but you cant place the same kind of moral and legal standard on things in game as you do IRL, otherwise everything breaks down and the system.
|
|
What I think keeps getting missed here is what the reality of Animate Dead would be like if Pathfinder took place in the real world. I would be as horrific and disrespectful to the body as any crime we have in todays world. Yet because we play in this fantasy world where we can do incredible things, such a crime in considered not evil DESPITE its descriptor. Thats a joke!!!!
If you are looking for something a little closer to IRL moral/law code standard, might I suggest you give D20Modern a try?
It's a fantastic game built off the 3.0 rules of DnD and is a ton of fun because there are very few issues of players not understanding how something in the setting works (Politics, laws, moreal standards, etc).
The game is placed in a city you know? Great! Now instead of making up places, you can play in REAL places.
|
I have seen several people saying using bodies is absolutely wretched. Many of us choose to donate ours bodies to science and or other people. Davinci was a grave robber in the name of science/art and most everyone regards him as a legendary innovator.
At what point did he make their bodies come back to life?
|
I have seen several people saying using bodies is absolutely wretched. Many of us choose to donate ours bodies to science and or other people. Davinci was a grave robber in the name of science/art and most everyone regards him as a legendary innovator.
I definitely chuckled at that last point. Excellent way to drive the point home!
|
And can I allow crafting then? What about non-standard races without boons? Restricted PRCs? That darn Fame cap on purchases? As long as my players are having fun, I'll go nuts on what rules actually count.
Okay, I was buying some of what you were selling up to this post. You know darn well that he was not advocating violations of the rules. The things you listed are all clearly illegal in PFS, animate dead is not. Shame on you.
|
|
I have seen several people saying using bodies is absolutely wretched. Many of us choose to donate ours bodies to science and or other people. Davinci was a grave robber in the name of science/art and most everyone regards him as a legendary innovator.At what point did he make their bodies come back to life?
Animated bodies would only have two, possibly three if you count dead cells as being cells, of the seven characteristics that biologists typically use to define life. Fire is much more alive than an animated corpse.
|
|
And can I allow crafting then? What about non-standard races without boons? Restricted PRCs? That darn Fame cap on purchases? As long as my players are having fun, I'll go nuts on what rules actually count.Okay, I was buying some of what you were selling up to this post. You know darn well that he was not advocating violations of the rules. The things you listed are all clearly illegal in PFS, animate dead is not. Shame on you.
My point is that I can't always tell what the rules are. Doug can, but he's got more PFS games registered than God. Once I start having to fudge what the rules are on Good vs Evil, it turns into a slippery slope.
In my area, I'm one of the few people who really sticks to Run As Written. When I have to say "excepting these rules", it erodes my standpoint.
|
|
OTOH, the good vs. evil thing is sooo in the eyes of the beholder that unless you are espousing an extreme view on either side, you are not violating the RAW or RAI.
We have a strange condition where spells like animate dead are legal and make no mistake, they are evil. The designers have said as much. However, for the sake of organized play, we are allowing them and in fact not enforcing a switch towards evil just for using them. I agree it is a weird "gray area," but many can do well to listen to what Doug said and just have fun...within the clearly defined rules of course.
|
|
I agree, except we also have the faction mission awkwardness. I have had players ask me why some evil acts are allowed and others are not. Some have said that they want to be a Scarzni player so they have a rules legal way to play evil and call it neutral. It frustrates other players, and it puts me in a bind.
|
|
Over the last few months Ive had a couple of players use this spell and the problems it creates are making me wonder how other PFS GMs deal with it.
Cheers
J-Bone
Thanks for GMing.
From your post it seems like you did a great job handling the situation.
PFS is Grey, not from lack of color and brightness but due to the myriad of colors and shade that can be found while playing.
There are some people who think that there is one way to play PFS. I think they are wrong. The fact that people like LASS and TetsujinOni can play the same scenarios and still come away with completely different experiences is proof of that.
While PFS character have to cooperate, players don't. If someone's play style is not in line with your own, you are free to ask not to play with that person. As GMs and organizer the best we can do is promote the style of play that we feel most people in our areas enjoy and hope the rest get the hint. At cons, and areas just getting PFS started, this can be kind of hard but its one of the risks of organized play and for me its worth it.
As far as your specific questions:
As far as I can tell there is no limit to the number of creatures you can have from that spell. If its disruptive though you have the power as a GM to make restrictions, as long as you explain the reasoning and give a warning or two first.
While casting the spell is not an evil act, the way it can be used might be. If you feel an action warrants warning about alignment feel free to write it on their chronicle. If they have a problem they can contact me.
Venture-Captain
Evan R. Whitefield
Venture-Agent, Colorado—Colorado Springs
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If I were to play a paladin, and I ended up participating in a scenario along side a reanimator or other evil-like character, I'd just assume it was all part of allying "with evil associates, but only to defeat what she believes to be a greater evil" only the need for atonement for doing so is unnecessary due to PFS guidelines. For RP purposes, my paladin wouldn't like it and might complain a bit, but would view it as an unwelcome necessity he'd have to tolerate until the scenario's quest was complete. "The need to complete our objective prevents me from acting against you... for now."
If I were to play a reanimator or other evil-like character and ended up participating in a scenario with a paladin, I'd assume the only reason he's not smiting me is because he's agreed to work along side me to thwart what he sees as a greater threat and I should avoid repeated action which may jeopardize such a viewpoint. "Hey, at least I'm not making my new undead dance the Macarena or reenact the Three Stooges for our amusement."
Though if anyone would like to check out what I consider a fantastic example of paladin-like goody-two-shoes cooperating with slaughters innocents for fun and laughs evil: Looking For Group
well technically the reanimator doesn't have to be of evil alignment, and therefor smite wouldn't work. Like a CN necromancer, or a Sorcerer with the undead blood line?
However I could see a case were the Paladin turned his undead flunkies and looked at the reanimator and said.... "There WILL be no more of THAT, find another way to be useful"
|
|
I gotta say, as a spell Animate Dead has moved from a quirky little spell used by a specific kind of character into the realm of Why-Would-You-Not-Use-It-Every-Time!!!! Once you take out the limiter of the chance to have your alignment switch you now have a spell that can put in play up to 4 times your lvl of undead minions. This means you've now created a tank, dealt with any trap finding problems, and probably created flankers for the rest of the party as well as a host of other options for the more creatively inspired character. If your a cleric casting it its even better because if your a negative channeler you can hang back and heal them. The rest of the party can sneak off to the bar and get beers while the Undead Horde deals with the scenario. Shame that the GM cant sneak off as well.
I cant wait to see the first cleric of Pharamsa, Erastil or Saranrea casting this and merely quoting the line from the PFS Guide that Im not responsible for my actions since Im being directed by the Decemvirate. That person will definitely get my PF shirt reroll.
|
Venture-Agent, Colorado—Colorado Springs
|
Clerics of Erastil and Sarenrae are prohibited from casting spells with the evil descriptor, even the neutral ones. Technically clerics of Pharasma can as this deity isn't good aligned, and may even provide the spell via a domain despite using it being against dogma.
|
|
I gotta say, as a spell Animate Dead has moved from a quirky little spell used by a specific kind of character into the realm of Why-Would-You-Not-Use-It-Every-Time!!!! Once you take out the limiter of the chance to have your alignment switch you now have a spell that can put in play up to 4 times your lvl of undead minions. This means you've now created a tank, dealt with any trap finding problems, and probably created flankers for the rest of the party as well as a host of other options for the more creatively inspired character. If your a cleric casting it its even better because if your a negative channeler you can hang back and heal them. The rest of the party can sneak off to the bar and get beers while the Undead Horde deals with the scenario. Shame that the GM cant sneak off as well.
I cant wait to see the first cleric of Pharamsa, Erastil or Saranrea casting this and merely quoting the line from the PFS Guide that Im not responsible for my actions since Im being directed by the Decemvirate. That person will definitely get my PF shirt reroll.
I assume you are being sarcastic.
It is within the GM's power to temper abuse if the players cannot police their own behavior. No one should have to endure watching a single player monopolize the table. Remember, the GM can always say "No" when common sense and common courtesy are being trampled on. It is the GM's job to make sure that everyone at the table is enjoying themselves. If this isn't happening, then what's the point of playing a game?
|
|
I gotta say, as a spell Animate Dead has moved from a quirky little spell used by a specific kind of character into the realm of Why-Would-You-Not-Use-It-Every-Time!!!! Once you take out the limiter of the chance to have your alignment switch you now have a spell that can put in play up to 4 times your lvl of undead minions. This means you've now created a tank, dealt with any trap finding problems, and probably created flankers for the rest of the party as well as a host of other options for the more creatively inspired character. If your a cleric casting it its even better because if your a negative channeler you can hang back and heal them. The rest of the party can sneak off to the bar and get beers while the Undead Horde deals with the scenario. Shame that the GM cant sneak off as well.
I cant wait to see the first cleric of Pharamsa, Erastil or Saranrea casting this and merely quoting the line from the PFS Guide that Im not responsible for my actions since Im being directed by the Decemvirate. That person will definitely get my PF shirt reroll.
One reason you might not do it every time is the cost. That Onyx adds up.
Nathan Meyers
NYC GM/Player
|
|
Sounds like a lot of table variance. One GM might rule that the army of dead is just a spell so lets roll, others might go with a 1 combat pet rule. That's my ultimate point and having dealt with it in a couple of games now there is clearly a wide wide margin between what one GM considers disruptive and another considers good play. Personally Im going with 1 combat pet and let the rest take on non combat roles but that's just me.
|
|
I gotta say, as a spell Animate Dead has moved from a quirky little spell used by a specific kind of character into the realm of Why-Would-You-Not-Use-It-Every-Time!!!! Once you take out the limiter of the chance to have your alignment switch you now have a spell that can put in play up to 4 times your lvl of undead minions. This means you've now created a tank, dealt with any trap finding problems, and probably created flankers for the rest of the party as well as a host of other options for the more creatively inspired character. If your a cleric casting it its even better because if your a negative channeler you can hang back and heal them. The rest of the party can sneak off to the bar and get beers while the Undead Horde deals with the scenario. Shame that the GM cant sneak off as well.
I cant wait to see the first cleric of Pharamsa, Erastil or Saranrea casting this and merely quoting the line from the PFS Guide that Im not responsible for my actions since Im being directed by the Decemvirate. That person will definitely get my PF shirt reroll.
One reason you might not do it every time is the cost. That Onyx adds up.
Nathan Meyers
NYC GM/Player
I would never try to make them personally in PFS for this very reason, but I do like claiming them. Even when you could keep them for an indefinite about of time, the onyx cost adds us. I am not willing to pay money for what would most often boil down to a summon spell with a 1 day duration.
While I have been very pro-necro up to this point in the thread, I don't like any character having lots of minions eating up time. The one or two henchman route is far preferred to the personal army..
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I guess the one key piece to the puzzle being missed is this:
In Pathfinder Society Organized Play, "Evil" descriptor spells are not inherently evil.
Any player/gm preconceived notion about "evil" is irrelevant to the above point. The only judgements that should be used against the PC is the use of the minions, or the possibly evil actions of acquiring corpses. It is no different than to summon huge fire elementals in a dry forest and watching it burn trees/cottages to the ground for fun. (the creation was not evil - the use was)
This does not prohibit fun role-playing for Good-aligned(or neutral) characters from being abhorred at the use of undead. (emphasis on word fun) I would enjoy the opportunity for my neutral gnome to meet/interact with a Pathfinder-Necromancer, yet he would not approve of such things. That is the joy of this game.
on the "pet rule": i disagree with the automatic assumption that you will not allow more than one undead to be controlled. If that is the case the druid should never bother with summoning multiple lower level animals... The GM taking control of summons should be a remediation step, not a preemptive step.
I guess the one key piece to the puzzle being missed is this:
In Pathfinder Society Organized Play, "Evil" descriptor spells are not inherently evil.
Any player/gm preconceived notion about "evil" is irrelevant to the above point. The only judgements that should be used against the PC is the use of the minions, or the possibly evil actions of acquiring corpses. It is no different than to summon huge fire elementals in a dry forest and watching it burn trees/cottages to the ground for fun. (the creation was not evil - the use was)
This does not prohibit fun role-playing for Good-aligned(or neutral) characters from being abhorred at the use of undead. (emphasis on word fun) I would enjoy the opportunity for my neutral gnome to meet/interact with a Pathfinder-Necromancer, yet he would not approve of such things. That is the joy of this game.
on the "pet rule": i disagree with the automatic assumption that you will not allow more than one undead to be controlled. If that is the case the druid should never bother with summoning multiple lower level animals... The GM taking control of summons should be a remediation step, not a preemptive step.
Well if this was the case, that neuters the whole BIG BAD evilness of the animator into a Diablo2 Necromancer (which I can dig) I could TOTALLY dig playing some kind of an undead lord.
with that being said what about 'acquiring corpses'? you mean as long as people don't disappear from town to bolster your army you are square? As in the orcs attacked, we killed them, now I raise them to fight the troll? See that I can dig.
I would totally want to play some kind of battle priest that controlled minions for certain battles.
What about evil alignments in PFS? can you play them? I mean I could probably pull off that type of character with a CN or N... but I could see a LE as well not creating a problem.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
the need for atonement...is unnecessary due to PFS guidelines
Not exactly correct. With the advent of the rules for alignment infractions, the GM can, if the situation presents itself, determine that your actions violate your tenets and you would have to atone. Of course, with respect to faction missions, there is a mulligan of sorts, but that does not provide paladins a get outta jail free card.
IMO, the thing that many people seem to forget is that paladins WANT to be lawful good. They are not adhering to the tenets as a way to avoid punishment. They don't say, "I better not do something evil or I'll get in trouble." They are living embodiments of strict adherence to law, order, and good. They would never TRY to find a loophole in the tenets to allow them to get away with something that could be argued as borderline or in a gray area. They would take the course of action that clearly and demonstratively adheres to the highest purity of goodness.
It is the reason why I enjoy playing paladins so much. There is a challenge to trying to be lawful good within a neutral society, occasionally with evil intentions. You have to balance the zealotry with the ability to get along with others or realistically the society would either boot you out or never let you join in the first place.
|
|
The Society needs Paladins and Clerics far, far more than they need the Society, so I'm not really sure that's true at all.
:)
But I do agree fully that Paladins, Clerics, and other characters that have this issue do want to be Good, and wouldn't be looking for loopholes or trying to find a "third option". They stand out as exemplars because they want to hold to their code, not beause they view it as a guideline to drop as it is convenient.
|
|
I gotta say, as a spell Animate Dead has moved from a quirky little spell used by a specific kind of character into the realm of Why-Would-You-Not-Use-It-Every-Time!!!! Once you take out the limiter of the chance to have your alignment switch you now have a spell that can put in play up to 4 times your lvl of undead minions. This means you've now created a tank, dealt with any trap finding problems, and probably created flankers for the rest of the party as well as a host of other options for the more creatively inspired character. If your a cleric casting it its even better because if your a negative channeler you can hang back and heal them. The rest of the party can sneak off to the bar and get beers while the Undead Horde deals with the scenario. Shame that the GM cant sneak off as well.
Your thinking small J-Bone. Cast desecrate on them first to double your numbers. And if your worried about the cost, play the modules where you get to keep them for the entire run, basically the equivalent of 3 scenarios. That probably means you get the chance to rest inbetween scenarios and if a Wizard punch up a bunch of Hastes to really make their monster mash a booty shaking event.
Meanwhile I'll be waiting for the new PrC Bystander which will hopefully offer me things to do while this mess happens.
|
|
As a VC Its part of my job to read the Message boards to keep up to date on things and answer questions where I can. I was not called in, I just wanted to let J-Bone know he did a good job and put my 2 cents into the discussion. I'm a little hurt that you would consider what I did micromanagement.
Also J-Bone, Lass, and TetsujinOni,
Please stop calling me Daddy
|
|
Your thinking small J-Bone. Cast desecrate on them first to double your numbers. And if your worried about the cost, play the modules where you get to keep them for the entire run, basically the equivalent of 3 scenarios. That probably means you get the chance to rest inbetween scenarios and if a Wizard punch up a bunch of Hastes to really make their monster mash a booty shaking event.
Meanwhile I'll be waiting for the new PrC Bystander which will hopefully offer me things to do while this mess happens.
Would that make it a Grave Yard Smash????
And Lass, you know your way too much of a powergamer to meet the prereqs for the Bystander Prestige Class. :-)
Why not, playing as a paladin, make the compromise of requiring animators to not resurrect thinking beings? If a necromancer raises a bear or a chimera it can't really be considered desecrating a corpse. In that case any evil being performed is purely metaphysical, surely something that can be at least accepted for the greater good of completing the mission? Necromancers should be able to live with that restriction and be prepared to bring something else to the table if all you're fighting that day is drow.
|
Venture-Lieutenant, Alabama—Huntsville
|
I hate to reanimate this thread, but (as I start casting) I am building a character that this thread impacts heavily. I am trying to build a neutral good necromancer who talks with the dead before reanimating, gains consent by offering help in avenging their death, a means of getting their body back to their loved ones, getting it to a temple to be resurrected, ect. If they don't concent the necromancer will not animate them but will do what he can to put their soul to rest. This is using the Shaman class and my aim is to find a way to use evil spells in good ways.
Would LG characters disown a necromancer who tried to help the dead find rest or recover victims' bodies in ways that are available to him? Would paladin's hate a shaman that reanimated beings but did not command them and simply walked them back to temples to help them? Can evil be used to do good? I really like the idea of making a philosophical mind blowing character that makes the players reevaluate their ideas after playing with him.
|
|
None of my characters would really have a problem with it.
Vati (Paladin, Ultimate Mercy specialist) might just raise the poor sod for free, just to avoid any questions of evil.
Ashan, Mystic Theurge of Ragathiel, would consider it borderline and would want to engage in a lively discussion of the ethics of what you are doing.
Everyone else would just shrug and keep moving.
|
|
Would LG characters disown a necromancer who tried to help the dead find rest or recover victims' bodies in ways that are available to him?
Most good characters are going to disown you. Non PCs are going to torch and pitchfork you in most areas. Raising the dead is evil. PFS rules mean you can keep your NG alignment, but not everyone is going to agree with you.
Would paladin's hate a shaman that reanimated beings but did not command them and simply walked them back to temples to help them?
Smite evil to your face.
Buy a horse and a sack.
Can evil be used to do good?
No, oddly enough.
I really like the idea of making a philosophical mind blowing character that makes the players reevaluate their ideas after playing with him.
It tends to come across as a little snide and smug.
|
Venture-Lieutenant, Alabama—Huntsville
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Most good characters are going to disown you. Non PCs are going to torch and pitchfork you in most areas. Raising the dead is evil. PFS rules mean you can keep your NG alignment, but not everyone is going to agree with you.
So most good aligned pathfinders refuse all connections to anything evil related? Most of my characters are good aligned and have always accepted infernal healing. Most of the players I have played with will accept a charge from a wand of infernal healing. If I get a person in need's consent to help them with a spell that is evil with no desire for a reward and do so it is evil and wrong?
Smite evil to your face.
Buy a horse and a sack.
So I should have a sack that I throw bodies in? Paladins prefer bodies crammed in sacks/crates possibly against the spirit's wishes over a willing spirit walking back on its own? This is better than getting the bodies to walk back and say their final goodbyes to their family?
No, oddly enough.
So I guess anything evil only begets evil? So tieflings are all evil and shouldn't be trusted because even though they are good they are actually evil.
It tends to come across as a little snide and smug.
It is snide and smug to try new things and challenge people to consider their ideas of good and evil? I guess you are not a fan of philosophers? Or morally gray situations.