AMIA ARCHIVE • View topic

ok been thinking of playing a paladin who falls from grace thou his race aasimar , i no its bit odd for evil one but ive only really noticed i hate him being to nice and cant stand thought of having to help people even if i dont wana.

it will basically come down to pride,vanity and his growing scorn at those who ask for help and seek others stronger than themselves for help.
im not sure what class i go after he falls, it basically come down to blackguard or maybe sorcerer/pale master, hes only lvl 4 at moment but like idea of blackguard. maybe have it that a evil god (not sure who yet) seduces his ego with talk of more power and with freedom do what he wants except when his god needs him.

help as usual be great. cheers kez

I'd keep a divine class. Cleric/BG for example. A pally transforming into a sorc seems a bit off track.

Evil Aasimar? *dies*

Seriously though, evil aasimar just don't happen. You can have the paladin falling and such without the Aasimar subrace.

Last edited by Kezman on Fri, May 29 2009, 17:52 PM, edited 1 time in total.

yeah aasimar things the bit i dont like either, just means i would have togo back and remake char again if i dont want it to be aasimar, and if do that i probaly just go and make a blackguard without paladin lvls, thou it is lvl 4 so not much of remake

nevermind think i just go remake char

I thought evil aasimir do happen, is that why they have the CHA bonus to give a plus to blackguards? sillyness aside I have seen evil aasmir and i just shake my head, they are touched with goodness. It is like Good Tieflings IMO.

Mind that you cannot make the same PC (same name, same person) with a different subrace/template. That just doesn't make any sense. I don't want to tell you exactly what to do, but you just can't do that.

A Paladin/BG class combo on Amia wont be allowed by the way. You will get a fallen item that will no longer allow you to use any Divine magics. Or all your Paladin levels will be removed.

"Evil aasimar, disappointed and embittered by how lesser beings treat them, are not completely unheard of"

thats from subrace info, so thats where i sort of thougth it might be ok to become fallen and evil. you said they touched with goodness but they also human to a extent, so i dont see it impossible them to show few bad human traits, i just think that theres many a thing that could change ones thoughts on life or just be seduced by the lust for power thats spinned by a conniving evil god.

Mahtan Tasadur wrote:

A Paladin/BG class combo on Amia wont be allowed by the way. You will get a fallen item that will no longer allow you to use any Divine magics. Or all your Paladin levels will be removed.

ok i make new character, so its ok if you want can lock this up

"Mind that you cannot make the same PC (same name, same person)"

yeah know, thats why just asking about falling part, i make entire new character now, just evil from start.

You could always rp that before becoming local to Amia you were a follower of whatever God. Have a secific hatred for the triadic knights or something?

A Evil Aasimar would be extremely rare

Mahtan Tasadur wrote:

Evil Aasimar? *dies*

Seriously though, evil aasimar just don't happen. You can have the paladin falling and such without the Aasimar subrace.

Why couldn't it happen to an Aasimar if it happens to full blooded Celestials, who are then marked as fallen and become Enrinyes'? Just out of curiosity.

I've seen worse things RP'ed than evil assimar. If you want to play an evil assimar then just go for it.

Last edited by Moridan_X on Sat, May 30 2009, 2:21 AM, edited 1 time in total.

evil aasimar are about as common as good/neutral aligned teiflings (anything with outsider blood that should be evil)

i disagree with everyone who says they are rare or 'cannot' happen
---
meh, evil aasimars don't happen and good teiflings simply don't happen (very rare, but this isn't faerun so they are very common. im surprised that no one actually plays an evil aasimar.

I think people go by a certain setting, in actuality these types of races that are Good instead of Evil and vice versa are rare, but on a server, they are bound to become more common since obviously people are going to want to play them and do.

Something I always thought was, just because a race is typically a certain way, doesn't mean that every entity of that race is going to be that way, to expect every single one to be say, Evil is just stereo-typical, isn't it?

2k8ste wrote:

Something I always thought was, just because a race is typically a certain way, doesn't mean that every entity of that race is going to be that way, to expect every single one to be say, Evil is just stereo-typical, isn't it?

True, but sometimes the stereotypes are there for a reason. And also sometimes you get so many people thinking they're going to play against the norm, that the thing that was supposed to be unique and unusual begins to become normal, and it then becomes unusual to see something that is supposed to be stereotypical.

I think I understand why people don't like it too much now, then.

It seems because they're being made more often, so they lose their X-factor and people want it to stay as unique as possible, though it doesn't because of the common use, or something along those lines maybe?

Drow spring to mind here - There are so many *kisses and huggles* and "im different from all the rest" Drow about that its become somewhat bad form to have IC disgust and loathing for them, just because they are drow.

stereotypes are changing...

The Cobbit wrote:

True, but sometimes the stereotypes are there for a reason. And also sometimes you get so many people thinking they're going to play against the norm, that the thing that was supposed to be unique and unusual begins to become normal, and it then becomes unusual to see something that is supposed to be stereotypical.

i didnt mean turn evil thats reason i asked question about is it ok to do it, and to be honest i didnt know that alot of people happenin to be playing evil aasimars. its put me off doing it cause it reminds me of all drow and other evil creatures played as good, its sort of annoying when they appear often.

I found this on another site, but I think if we are talking about good tieflings then it should be mentioned here. btw IMO most teiflings are either neutral or evil rarely good, which means seldom seen.

Having a Tiefling who wants to do good isn't as hard as it sounds. The trick is to successfully implement "the means justify the goal." A "good" Tiefling wanting to stop the evil baron who's oppressing the peasants could very well abduct the Baron's daughter and threaten to kill her if the oppression doesn't end. The goal is good - to stop the oppression, but the means is evil - abduction and possible murder. In the same way, he could mug the rich (not steal, like Robin Hood - but actually jump out and beat up the noble whether or not the Noble is a greedy one or not, and steal their gold from the unconscious battered nobleman) and give to the poor. As long as the plus and minus is zero, I think he'd be considered neutral. A good person will not do evil things - even if the end goal is good, while a neutral person may very well do that.

To get off subject the main races are almost unheard of. A human (no subrace) comes to mind. To me finding just a plain human is rarer on amia then anything else. Top most common is Halfdragon... So *nods and shuts up*

I wouldn't say Tieflings or Aasimar have a particularly compelling inclination towards any alignment innately. They're not fiends or celestials, they're humans with one or two atypical traits and a night hag/hound archon dozen generations back in the family, for example. I don't see why evil Aasimar would be any more unusual than lawful evil Moon elves, chaotic dwarves or neutral good half-orcs, to be honest. (Relatively speaking, of course, and not in absolute numbers; Aasimar are much more uncommon to begin with.)

Apart from highly magical beings, such as dragons, planar beings or illithids, nature matters much more than nurture. A mistreated Aasimar slum brat is quite likely to turn, if not evil, then at least disillusioned and cold, whereas a Tiefling grown up in a loving family will surely turn out to be a decent bloke. Blatant stereotypes aren't the only or best way, the trick to interesting characters is adding subtle twists that may in fact conflict with the PC's general personality.

That was a point I was trying to make in another post a while ago, people saying Good Tieflings should never be made, I couldn't see why they wouldn't be swayed by the other three quarters of their heritage to act in another way, it is only one-quarter Fiendish blood and three-quarters of whatever that may collide with being Evil.

the thing is iron, they have a tendenc for good or evil. Aassimir are good alinged creatures normally and tieflings are evil aligned creatures normally. They would still have that instinct within them to do good/evil. This is how i see it anyways.

2k8ste wrote:

That was a point I was trying to make in another post a while ago, people saying Good Tieflings should never be made, I couldn't see why they wouldn't be swayed by the other three quarters of their heritage to act in another way, it is only one-quarter Fiendish blood and three-quarters of whatever that may collide with being Evil.

this is what a tiefling is:

Monster Manual wrote:

Fiends' magical nature allows them to crossbreed with virtually any creature. Spawned deep in the dark, nether planes, these fiendish offspring are abominations that plague the mortal creatures.

Demons and devils bring their progeny along to the Material Plane and loose them upon the world. Sometimes, however, fiends force themselves on mortal creatures to create evil half-breeds. The more depraved creatures are sometimes even willing to participate. Although half-fiend offspring are usually destroyed at birth, some survive to become grotesque mockeries of their mortal parents. All too rarely, though, one learns form and takes on the characteristics of its nonfiendish parent, turning from its evil heritage.

No matter the form, half-fiends are always hideous to behold, having dark scales, horns, glowing red eyes, batwings, a fetid odor, or some other obvious sign that they are tainted with evil.

Never truly fitting into any mortal society, half fiends are usually loners. In the infernal planes, they are mistreated and derided for their impure nature. Among non-fiends, they are outcasts, hated corruptions of natural order. Humanoid half-fiends are sometimes called "cambions." They often serve more powerful fiends or lead evil creatures on the Material Plane.

a tiefling is compelled to do evil just as an aasimar is to do good.

oh, and according to da wiki, there are evil aasimar, but they are hunted by their other home boys.

so if you get popped in the face, i'll lol

but i doubt any aasimar in amia will start a conflict with anything evil (interestingly enough i've seen them side with the demons :] which is a lol)

The way I see it Aasimar cannot be ~evil~ but they can be misguided/manipulated into doing evil deeds but the core soul is innately good, and once they "see the light" the manipulator is in for some smiting.

Moridan_X wrote:

this is what a tiefling is:

Monster Manual wrote:

Fiends' magical nature allows them to crossbreed with virtually any creature. Spawned deep in the dark, nether planes, these fiendish offspring are abominations that plague the mortal creatures.

Demons and devils bring their progeny along to the Material Plane and loose them upon the world. Sometimes, however, fiends force themselves on mortal creatures to create evil half-breeds. The more depraved creatures are sometimes even willing to participate. Although half-fiend offspring are usually destroyed at birth, some survive to become grotesque mockeries of their mortal parents. All too rarely, though, one learns form and takes on the characteristics of its nonfiendish parent, turning from its evil heritage.

No matter the form, half-fiends are always hideous to behold, having dark scales, horns, glowing red eyes, batwings, a fetid odor, or some other obvious sign that they are tainted with evil.

Never truly fitting into any mortal society, half fiends are usually loners. In the infernal planes, they are mistreated and derided for their impure nature. Among non-fiends, they are outcasts, hated corruptions of natural order. Humanoid half-fiends are sometimes called "cambions." They often serve more powerful fiends or lead evil creatures on the Material Plane.

a tiefling is compelled to do evil just as an aasimar is to do good.

Nope, i think you have gotten mixed up, that is about Half-Fiends not Tieflings, and more specifically, Infernal ones and also isn't the whole truth since Incubi/Succubi (Which are Abyssal not Infernal) aren't completely hideous, despite the horns, fangs Etc..

they also tend to shift into a Human form which conceals the fact they have Fiendish blood, so they could quite possibly look exactly the same as they did before, except no large fangs, horns and possibly even smaller in height, eye colour doesn't always matter either since Cambion; Incubi/Succubi can have a large range of eye colours, including human-like ones.

And...

IronAngel wrote:

I wouldn't say Tieflings or Aasimar have a particularly compelling inclination towards any alignment innately. They're not fiends or celestials, they're humans with one or two atypical traits and a night hag/hound archon dozen generations back in the family, for example. I don't see why evil Aasimar would be any more unusual than lawful evil Moon elves, chaotic dwarves or neutral good half-orcs, to be honest. (Relatively speaking, of course, and not in absolute numbers; Aasimar are much more uncommon to begin with.)

What you wrote pretty much contradicts what IronAngel said, and since Iron is really good on lore, I will believe him/her unless proven otherwise.

Well, I'll contradict Iron then and say the instinct to do good or evil is there and exists heavily simply because it's often a "definition" thing. Celestials Are Good, etc. DnD says "This thing is good because it is good and it wasnts to do good". Aasimar tend toward those traits by instinct.

TormakSaber wrote:

Well, I'll contradict Iron then and say the instinct to do good or evil is there and exists heavily simply because it's often a "definition" thing. Celestials Are Good, etc. DnD says "This thing is good because it is good and it wasnts to do good". Aasimar tend toward those traits by instinct.

I'm inclined to agree with Tormak

Firstly, the whole aligment system in DnD is horribly broken to start with, as the main notion seems to be that 'destroying evil is what makes someone good'. On the contrary, those that hunt down, persecute and kill wrongdoers with zeal and without remorse is what I would call dangerous psycothics inclined to support totalitarian governments, from a modern point of view. Tyrs plane actually sounds like a rather totalitarian paradise with parallells to North Korea, except that everyone is happy and stuff. Deviants are definatly not tolerated.

Second, with the huge numbers of half-fiends, half-dragons, tieflings and evil races that are good or neutral, I really cant see the problem with an evil or neutral aasimar now and then. I actually find the whole 'fallen from grace' theme to be very appealing if its pulled off well enough. A "fallen" aasimar in opposition to the Triadic Knights because he sees them as oppressive and cruel, without becoming the "I eat your babies, muahaha" is something I really want to see.

Agent of Chaos anyone?

Quote:

On the contrary, those that hunt down, persecute and kill wrongdoers with zeal and without remorse is what I would call dangerous psycothics inclined to support totalitarian governments, from a modern point of view.

And that's why your view is failing to reconcile the logic. DnD and FR is not the modern world.

Halecta wrote:

A Evil Aasimar would be extremely rare

In standard lore they are... cause they were all dumped on amia.
We kinda work like Australia, they used to dump their convicts there.
On amia they dump all freaks to not mention them again.

That I know, but I maintain my point that the DnD aligment system is inheritly broken when it follows no reasonable logic. Having a game setting that in the end is all about Absolute Good vs Absolute Evil, as to forces that have more in common than what sets them apart is ofcourse nice and dandy and makes for good stories, but I still see it as silly restraints.

When tieflings, drow etc can be good and huggly cuddly, it would be very odd if aasimars couldnt be evil, or in the very least defy thier heritage.

Tormak did not contradict me or say anything I disagree with.

There is an inclination, which I indirectly admitted. Just like there is an inclination among Dwarves to be lawful, among Drow to be evil and among Elves to be good, though probably somewhat stronger because of the supernatural heritage.

What I said is that there's no compelling inclination, that is, a powerful and irresistable effect.

In Races of Faerûn, the very first paragraph about Aasimar states they have a great potential to do good, but they're also often persecuted for what they are, becoming bitter and sometimes evil. (Direct quote: "It is not unknown for an aasimar to give in to bitterness in the face of adversity and turn to evil.") Under Outlook, evil Aasimar sorcerers and blackguards are specifically mentioned as terrible opponents, and deities like Shar and Set are said to love corrupting Aasimar; which probably isn't too difficult, considering they're typically feared, hated, ridiculed and/or distrusted for being freaks. Knowing you're better than others, having a high and mighty calling in your blood and being shunned despite all this makes you quite suspect to giving into righteous wrath and intolerant eradication of what you percieve as corrupt. Or, on the other hand, they might become vigilantes who disdain human laws and sense of conscience, stepping above the law to mete out punishment as they see fit. Zealous murder is oftentimes evil, even if it's done for a noble cause.

So, no offence to anyone who disagrees, but I lol at people who cry evil Aasimar are wrong. Books clearly state they exist, and aren't even terribly rare (or they wouldn't be mentioned several times). Besides, I wish people stepped out of their little boxes and started role-playing characters that are a bit more interesting and complex than Dr. Evil.

Just because something directly clashes against the racial norm doesn't automatically make it comeplling and complex.

I don't quite get why Aasimar would be hated, either, IU figured them sort of along the Paladin lines. People like Good Guys, Aasimars are directly related to The Best Good Guys Ever: Celestials.

Well, that just seems to be the theme with all Planetouched, and I can certainly understand it: if a guy with shiny eyes and feathers on his cheeks was born into a rural village all of a sudden, I bet the villagers would be quite shocked. Whether they're good or evil, they look like freaks and probably feel wrong, different. In a community where Planetouched were virtually unknown and no tradition for respecting them exists, I doubt they'd be associated with good guys. Hells, I doubt common folk would be very happy to encounter a Hound Archon either, no matter how good a good guy it is.

In places like Waterdeep or Calimshan, I guess people wouldn't look twice at it. But the majority of places are rather backwater and Planetouched are rare, I guess. But there's many ways to play Planetouched and several different backgrounds, just take your pick. I don't agree with the view of Aasimar universally as traditional paragons of good and all Tieflings as savage, petty criminals who can't overcome their blood. Regardless of what individual concepts are boring or interesting, it's certain that diversity and originality is more interesting than doing what everyone's doing. This goes for both the Fall-from-Grace and Paragon-of-Good themes, really. Why not come up with something a little bit different?

To sum it up, all I see in this thread is *nag nag, don't do that, that's wrong, some more elitistic whining* and that's what I hate.

Sounds like what you do quite often, tbh.

QPR wrote:

That I know, but I maintain my point that the DnD aligment system is inheritly broken when it follows no reasonable logic. Having a game setting that in the end is all about Absolute Good vs Absolute Evil, as to forces that have more in common than what sets them apart is ofcourse nice and dandy and makes for good stories, but I still see it as silly restraints.

That's because you live in a world of moral relativism. PHB: "Good and evil are not philosophical concepts in the D&D game. They are the forces that define the cosmos."

Unlike real life, in D&D there are actual gods that are active, and these actively judge. What is good and what is evil are actively defined as an absolute concept. Also, in real life you do not have avatars of pure good striding the land, destroying creatures of absolute evil, or magic, and it is these that help set apart what is good and evil.

There is nothing 'broken' about the system - there is no grievous imbalance that needs to be fixed, as it functions exactly like it should. Just because you see something as silly doesn't make it broken .

TormakSaber wrote:

Sounds like what you do quite often, tbh.

Not true! >_< I try not to ever whine when people get ideas. I usually only say they're wrong when they try to stomp on someone else's idea, like's being done here. I have no qualms telling people, "Do this because X reason makes it cooler", but I do have qualms with "Don't do that, it's wrong!"

Yurell, you're both right and wrong. It's not broken per se, but people read it wrong. One might be so bold as to say there's absolute good and evil in the real world, too. Yet we can't point to something and say "that's 100% good." I don't see why people or even gods in the Realms would have such clairvoyance, even if there is an abstract Goodness somewhere in the high heavens. Neither does it mean that individual actions (like "killing" or "stealing" as categories, not as unique occurances) are universally good or evil, like many seem to think. It's just flawed logic, outright fallacy, and I have shown it in other threads. But that's seriously off-topic. >_>

This

\/

Moridan_X wrote:

a tiefling is compelled to do evil just as an aasimar is to do good.

Contradicts this is what I ment.

\/

IronAngel wrote:

I wouldn't say Tieflings or Aasimar have a particularly compelling inclination towards any alignment innately. They're not fiends or celestials, they're humans with one or two atypical traits and a night hag/hound archon dozen generations back in the family, for example.

And now also this.

\/

IronAngel wrote:

What I said is that there's no compelling inclination, that is, a powerful and irresistable effect.

The MM describes evil as "inherent tendencies" for tieflings.

That sounds about right. A tendency will either flourish or wither based on nurture, that is, experiences in life. Under identical conditions, a tiefling would be more likely to turn evil than a human. I would be even more disappointed in a Planetouched PC who sported no personality traits and tendencies of their supernatural heritage, than I would in a paperdoll stereotype PC. The middle way is usually best, I find. What I would personally find lame is an Aasimar PC with no regards for ethics. An interesting character, on the other hand, would be one who feels strongly about right and wrong, but his experiences have twisted his moral compass to make him a frustrated, self-righteous vigilante. The Count of Monte Cristo could very well be a fallen Aasimar!

It's better to stick to Races of Faerûn and possibly some Planescape material, though. Monster Manuals aren't exactly famous for the rich lore. Their purpose is to give people stuff to kill.

still playing this char, but the posts from evey1 have helped in a way even ones that say dont do. im probaly not gonna go pure evil just whatever suits his morals, but he will go about killing evil/undead as he see's fit and will do whatever he can to stop it, he believes that sometimes people will get hurt or killed by accident when he tries to kill the undead/wicked but thats exceptable if he can stop them, so basically he will be a avenger for good but he will do whatever necessary in the end for greater good even thou it means hurting some else in the process.

( just wondering would any goods appreciate a paladin who does what it takes for the greater good) and what alignment would i end up as....

Kezman wrote:

( just wondering would any goods appreciate a paladin who does what it takes for the greater good) and what alignment would i end up as....

Doing whatever it takes for the greater good can land you anywhere in the LG-CG line, although chances are one would Fall.

Yurell wrote:

Doing whatever it takes for the greater good can land you anywhere in the LG-CG line, although chances are one would Fall.

i really dont care what alignment i fall to be honest cause my build suck once i lose pally lvls, i just want alignement thats suits my char.....if anyone read warhammer book witch hunter thats what my char like, hes brutal when hes trying kill evil, he not worry about others lives and that he also believes he above others and that they should stand aside or just comply and help him with his figths/battles cause he is only one blessed by his god to truly figth them.

Kezman wrote:

Yurell wrote:

Doing whatever it takes for the greater good can land you anywhere in the LG-CG line, although chances are one would Fall.

i really dont care what alignment i fall to be honest cause my build suck once i lose pally lvls, i just want alignement thats suits my char.....if anyone read warhammer book witch hunter thats what my char like, hes brutal when hes trying kill evil, he not worry about others lives and that he also believes he above others and that they should stand aside or just comply and help him with his figths/battles cause he is only one blessed by his god to truly figth them.

I think that'd be LG to NG IMO, although I must say I find it difficult to accept Witch Hunters' definition for 'Good' and I'd dump them as LN myself, but to each their own.

Whether they're related to celestials doesn't really matter. It comes down to the natural subrace bonuses:

Aasimars get +2 charisma
Tieflings get -2 Charisma

Now the definition of Charisma is how people perceive you: which can be done either by looks, personality and leadership skills. My interpretation is that an aasimar is more inclined to help people because people are naturally attracted to them wheras the tiefling is more inclined to stick to themself because people naturally hate them.

Hence it will be very difficult for an Aasimar to go out of his way to do bad things. The closest evil you're going to get is the chaotic good "sacrifice the village to save the world." Will people think he's bad? Nobody cares, he saved the world!

Other factors can include physical traits.

Aasimar have diffrent features depending on what type of Good outsider (does not need to be Celestial, although most are) it shares ancestry with. the more extreme features may be more inclined to instill fear or praise depending on the culture

One thing about Fallen paladins is that they might even stay LG and Fall. The paladin's code is much stricter than just the confines of the LG alignment, and you might very well fall for doing things that are unacceptable to a paladin but not enough to change your alignment. Just some food for thought.

IronAngel wrote:

One thing about Fallen paladins is that they might even stay LG and Fall. The paladin's code is much stricter than just the confines of the LG alignment, and you might very well fall for doing things that are unacceptable to a paladin but not enough to change your alignment. Just some food for thought.

Yup ... that's why I never discounted LG as an alignment :wink:

Paladin code is a subset of LG, not the other way around.

fallen paladin

Who is online