Breaking a devil's Contract

[Unifel]

So my predicament is simple. In my campaign (we switch around DM's, so sometimes i'm DM and sometimes other people are) my character is a swordsage 16 / Master of Nine 2. A tiefling PC made me sign a devil pact that I would give him one favor in order to save me from drowning, and I grudgingly agreed. The wording: "I, (insert full name here) must give (Tiefling's full name) a favor when asked, and I cannot say no, and I cannot tell anyone about this favor."
The favor he made me do, which I didn't think was possible at the time, was to make me sign more similar slips. So he basically owns my character now. I'm trying to find a loophole to break this, or at least let the other PCs know what's going on, because this Tiefling is already treading the line between friend and foe pretty closely and the other PCs might actually attack him if they knew, freeing me if he died.
Any ideas? Or should I resign to a life of servitude?

[Rubik]

Is it a magically binding contract? If not, just say no. If it is, Break Enchantment. Otherwise, creative use of Bestow Curse or Greater Bestow Curse. Or Greater Dispel Magic. Or Disjunction. Or have someone else that you trust sign you up for a competing contract that forces you to break the other one.

[Mnemnosyne]

Simple: the stipulation is against telling anyone. Arrange to have someone observe you being required to perform additional favors. You can outright explain 'there's something I cannot tell you about, but if you watch me carefully you will learn something important' because while the wording states you can't tell anyone, it says nothing about asking someone to keep an eye on you. If you're never out of sight of your party members, there will be two possibilities: you can't be asked to do any more favors if the guy is unwilling to ask for them while being observed, or you will be observed being asked for one.

This, by the way, is totally in 'wishing for more wishes' territory, and you're entirely justified to go ahead and pull any and all infinite wish loops you want to, using this very event that the DM is apparently foisting on you as precedent for it working.

[Alex Xeno]

Ok, well I see a few ways, all of it has to do with taking advantage of it's poor wording.

One: look in a dictionary for what a favour actually is. you should be able to figure it out from there.

Two: I don't see anything saying you can't talk about the contract itself. Just whatever "favour" he asks you to do.

Also, The DM should have made the contracts more prciece in some way. Like, the contract acts like Geas, or like Suggestion. As for making you sign more contracts... Well I think even devils can't force one to sign their contracts, it must be done out of free will, else they would just charm and suggestion everyone into doing it and the world would be taken over just like that.

[Dungeon_Crawler]

If your chaotic, ignore it. Its a benefit of that alignment axis

[Silva Stormrage]

Yes, the DM shouldn't be able to force you to sign contracts against your will. Otherwise domination would be a way to get almost all souls to go to hell.

One thing I should note though, what prevents you from simply KILLING the devil? Like next time he shows up just stab him with a deadly maneuver. Or better yet, get a wizard or cleric to scry on you. Once the devil shows up have them all appear and then kill him together.

[Lord Vukodlak]

Yes, the DM shouldn't be able to force you to sign contracts against your will. Otherwise domination would be a way to get almost all souls to go to hell.

One thing I should note though, what prevents you from simply KILLING the devil? Like next time he shows up just stab him with a deadly maneuver. Or better yet, get a wizard or cleric to scry on you. Once the devil shows up have them all appear and then kill him together. Its a PC Tiefling who can apparently deal out Devil pacts.


If your chaotic, ignore it. Its a benefit of that alignment axis Supernatural pacts do not work that way.


So my predicament is simple. In my campaign (we switch around DM's, so sometimes i'm DM and sometimes other people are) my character is a swordsage 16 / Master of Nine 2. A tiefling PC made me sign a devil pact that I would give him one favor in order to save me from drowning, and I grudgingly agreed. The wording: "I, (insert full name here) must give (Tiefling's full name) a favor when asked, and I cannot say no, and I cannot tell anyone about this favor."
The favor he made me do, which I didn't think was possible at the time, was to make me sign more similar slips. So he basically owns my character now. I'm trying to find a loophole to break this, or at least let the other PCs know what's going on, because this Tiefling is already treading the line between friend and foe pretty closely and the other PCs might actually attack him if they knew, freeing me if he died.
Any ideas? Or should I resign to a life of servitude?

Well for one thing I recall from Tyrants of The Nine Hells you can't compel someone into a pact it has to be entered into willingly so actually your right he couldn't do that. I do remember a quest from NWN2 where you have to get someone out of a devil's pact.

Or because the wording was you can't "tell anyone" your free to write it down on a dozen pieces of paper and leave them where a party member is sure to find. You could also argue that a telling a rock is not telling anyone so you aren't stopped from telling a rock what the PC did, if someone should happen to over hear what you told the rock, well you didn't tell them they were just eavesdropping.

[Silva Stormrage]

Another solution for getting other people to know is mind reading. You didn't tell them! They just read your mind about significant events that have been happening to you. Not your fault at all, even if you told them to do that :smalltongue:

[Psyren]

Or because the wording was you can't "tell anyone" your free to write it down on a dozen pieces of paper and leave them where a party member is sure to find. You could also argue that a telling a rock is not telling anyone so you aren't stopped from telling a rock what the PC did, if someone should happen to over hear what you told the rock, well you didn't tell them they were just eavesdropping.

And rocks are blabbermouths anyway. (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/stoneTell.htm)

[Crake]

Signing away your freedom goes beyond the bounds of a "Favour". I think you just derped here, and signed away your life without questioning it. If your DM forced you to sign it on the basis that he was saying signing a soul binding contract comes under a "favour", and you argued against that, then I'd say bring it up with your DM, because yeah, that should definitely count as more than a favour.

[Kane0]

Did he specify what favour you were to agree on? Was it simply 'the next favour i ask of you'? Either are easy enough to slip out of.

Also, by following his first favor to agree to follow the next favor you have been supernaturally coerced to make that second deal, which means it has no effect. The tiefling has essentially wasted his favor.

[Rubik]

Did he specify what favour you were to agree on? Was it simply 'the next favour i ask of you'? Either are easy enough to slip out of.

Also, by following his first favor to agree to follow the next favor you have been supernaturally coerced to make that second deal, which means it has no effect. The tiefling has essentially wasted his favor.Well, he can't tell anyone, and unless he makes either a Knowledge: Religion or Knowledge: Arcana check, he'll be willingly doing favors from now on, which is sure to get him sent to the hells when it's all over.

[Psyren]

@ threat topic: "Your favor is to do me 10 more favors" is bullcrap. If real actual devils can't get you to do that, some up-jumped tiefling has no chance either.

[HunterOfJello]

Faustian Pacts with Hell require you to write your signature with blood onto a magical contract (scroll or piece of paper). Verbal contracts don't count, so don't go signing ****.

[Lord Vukodlak]

Faustian Pacts with Hell require you to write your signature with blood onto a magical contract. Verbal contracts don't count, so don't go signing ****.
Well he's already signed them so its neither here nor there.

[HunterOfJello]

Well he's already signed them so its neither here nor there.


Ah, then I suggest murdering the Tiefling in his/her sleep, then fulfilling the rest of the terms of what you've signed. Whatever terms you've signed to not bring harm to the Tiefling, find a way around them.

Remember to get an Atonement spell cast on you later to wash away all the grime you build up.

[Slipperychicken]

"I, (insert full name here) must give (Tiefling's full name) a favor when asked, and I cannot say no, and I cannot tell anyone about this favor."

That wasn't very smart. This doesn't actually compel you to do the favor he asked; just any old favor you want to give him.


You could have just said "I refuse to do this favor, so **** off and die", loaned him a copper piece as a favor, then proceeded to ignore it without consequence.

[Mikeavelli]

You are an idiot. This doesn't actually compel you to do the favor he asked; just any old favor you want to give him.


You could have just said "I refuse to do this favor, so **** off and die", loaned him a copper piece as a favor, then proceeded to ignore it without consequence.

There are three clauses.

Must give him a favor when asked,
cannot say no,
cannot tell anyone about the favor.

the 'cannot say no' is curiously redundant, but doesn't negate the 'must give a favor when asked' clause. Similarly, voluntarily giving him a coin doesn't count, because he didn't ask for it, so it doesn't fulfill the clause.

----

That said, have you given him a favor? "a" is singular, you only need to give him one. It doesn't apply to any future favors.

[Khatoblepas]

The wording: "I, (insert full name here) must give (Tiefling's full name) a favor when asked, and I cannot say no, and I cannot tell anyone about this favor."
...let the other PCs know what's going on... the other PCs might actually attack him if they knew, freeing me if he died.

"Hey, that dude made me sign a devilish pact when he tried to drown me*, he's obviously evil and we should kill him, I wish to wipe away the sins I had to do in order to stay alive."

Hey, it said you can't talk about the favor. Not that you can't talk about the pact. This Tiefling is a newb, you can handle him.

*He's an evil PC, it's not beyond his alignment to try to set you up.

[Slipperychicken]

That said, have you given him a favor? "a" is singular, you only need to give him one. It doesn't apply to any future favors.

When he asks for a favor, you must give him one favor. Doesn't say it has to be the one he asks for.

[Mikeavelli]

When he asks for a favor, you must give him one favor. Doesn't say it has to be the one he asks for.

Yeah, it does. Grammatically, that singular favor is the favor that must be given when asked. Any other favor would be a different favor than the one asked, and would not fulfill the clause.

[Yogibear41]

The thing about Devil contracts is, they MUST abide by them as written too.

The only thing is they normally write up a contract that seems simple enough but use enough legal loop-holes more or less to screw you over, even though technically they have followed the contract to 100% of its written letter.

The way out of it is to basically either find a loophole that you yourself can abuse, or you can try contacting an elder pit fiend yourself and accuse the tiefling of being unlawful in his contract in which case it would be immediately revoked, at least this is what I have learned more or less from my experiences.
(3 of the players in a game I play in sold their souls for amazing powers and they were each given a year to complete incredibly difficult tasks or they die and go to hell, even if they succeed when they die their souls are still forfeit) basically what me and another player(cleric) learned was that trick with the high ranking devil, or we also learned that a chaotic god might be able to break the contract if they were willing to have it broken(they were not willing dang fools....) Ironically they were LG, NG, and LN in alignment and continue to say they are good and what they did was for the greater good and blah blah(well except the LN one he did it to be able to protect his family better, which is somewhat more believable yet we haven't even returned to his village in about 8 months in game time lol.


EDIT: of course the contracts in the game I play in where incredibly long and not some simple sentences like the one you have, in fact they were so long and complex the characters were required to make wis or int checks (can't remember which) to be able to actually discern what the contracts terms were.

[Pesimismrocks]

Since when have Tieflings had a supernatural racial ability which forces you to abide by contracts? And what's his alignment and yours? And if he won't let you tell anyone stay within earshot of the others. Good party members will hate this.
How many papers have you signed? If it's just the one he can't mass produce the contract as it is only one favor.

[jaydubs]

Yeah, it does. Grammatically, that singular favor is the favor that must be given when asked. Any other favor would be a different favor than the one asked, and would not fulfill the clause.

It's a devil's pact situation, where the devil is pulling shenanigans like using the favor to get more favors. He has every right to interpret the contract as narrowly as he pleases. The tiefling clearly isn't acting in good faith, so neither should he.

The specific wording was "I, (insert full name here) must give (Tiefling's full name) a favor when asked, and I cannot say no, and I cannot tell anyone about this favor."

It doesn't say "must perform the specified favor when asked for a favor." It doesn't even say must give the favor when asked. It's says a favor. A, as in an unspecified, single favor per slip signed. If he argues it, pull out a dictionary and show him how "a" is an indefinite article, which by definition means he can't force you to do a single, specific thing.

When the tiefling commands you to do something, give him a backrub. When he asks what you're doing, tell him he looked kind of tense and you wanted to help him out. For the next favor, wash his cloak. And after that, bake him a pie. As long as you're doing things that a person would normally find helpful, they count.

[Evolved Shrimp]

Yeah, it does. Grammatically, that singular favor is the favor that must be given when asked. Any other favor would be a different favor than the one asked, and would not fulfill the clause.

The contract says "must give a favor when asked". It does not say "must give the requested favor" or anything to that effect.

In other words, the contract binds the swordsage to provide some kind of favor to the tiefling, at a time of the tiefling's choosing, but which kind of favor is entirely up to the swordsage.

This is not, of course, the intended meaning of the contract, but since we've passed into lawyer territory here, that hardly matters.

Edit: Swordsaged

[Mikeavelli]

When using an indefinite article, the listener does not necessarily know the subject, but the speaker does, and the grammatical structure is still referring to a single noun. Furthermore, 'When Asked' is a Relative Clause (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relative_clause)which links the favor to it being asked.

In order for the clause to be fulfilled, the given favor must be the same as the asked for favor. While you might legitimately claim to be confused about the favor being asked if there were some ambiguity during the asking, it is impossible to claim a completely unrelated favor would fulfill the clause.

Since this is a Devil's contract, since the speaker is unambiguously referring to a given favor, any mistake on the part of the listener is the listener's fault. Performing an unrelated favor, or even performing the favor in a manner inconsistent with the speaker's expectations, would constitute a breach of contract. This would end poorly for the listener.

[AuraTwilight]

Has anyone brought up the fact that, since the contract was to save you from drowning, that it was obviously made under duress? Meaning that by Baator's own courts, the contract isn't valid? If not signing the contract results in the mortal's death, that counts as "under duress", whether the devil is responsible for the death or not.

[jaydubs]

When using an indefinite article, the listener does not necessarily know the subject, but the speaker does, and the grammatical structure is still referring to a single noun. Furthermore, 'When Asked' is a Relative Clause (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relative_clause)which links the favor to it being asked.

In order for the clause to be fulfilled, the given favor must be the same as the asked for favor. While you might legitimately claim to be confused about the favor being asked if there were some ambiguity during the asking, it is impossible to claim a completely unrelated favor would fulfill the clause.

Since this is a Devil's contract, since the speaker is unambiguously referring to a given favor, any mistake on the part of the listener is the listener's fault. Performing an unrelated favor, or even performing the favor in a manner inconsistent with the speaker's expectations, would constitute a breach of contract. This would end poorly for the listener.

This isn't a court of law where the most reasonable or natural reading governs. There is no expectation of good faith, especially with the tiefling essentially "wishing for more wishes." It's in the same realm of interactions as Efreeti purposefully subverting your wishes into something awful. I.e., if the wording is vague enough to let a party interpret it as he or she desires, he gets to do it.

You say it's a "relative clause" that defines the favor specifically? Fine. I say it just means he has to do a favor at around the same time. As in, the OP has to go bake a pie right then instead of tomorrow. Because of the nature of the dealing (faustian contracts), the very fact that the OP can make an argument about a different interpretation means the tiefling has lost.

And here's the other thing. The tiefling has no real recourse but to get mad and attack. And if he's worried about things like other PCs getting mad, he must not be powerful enough for his wrath to be all that imposing.

[Evolved Shrimp]

In order for the clause to be fulfilled, the given favor must be the same as the asked for favor.

Try replacing “favor” with “dollar”, and the issue becomes clearer: “I must give the tiefling a dollar when asked.”

This is very likely to be understood by a majority of people to mean that the tiefling can ask me for a dollar when he so desires, and I must give it to him, but he cannot demand a specific dollar (such as the collectible silver dollar I might happen to have, or even that I must give him a dollar note instead of, e.g., four quarters). Barring specific wording in the contract that says otherwise, a dollar’s a dollar and a favor’s a favor.

Furthermore, if the tiefling would have desired the right to demand a specific favor, there are any number of ways that he could have unambiguously worded the contract (such as "When [the tiefling] asks me for a favor, I will give that favor to him.”). The fact that he failed to do so clearly indicates that he did not want the right to, at any point, specify the favor to be given.

At least that’s what my lawyer would argue in court… :smallsmile:

[OracleofWuffing]

Whether or not a Devil's Contract is a Faustian Pact (I'm running of Fiendish Codex II, page 23 for that) is a bit of a toss-up, but I think that's probably the closest the books would have to the case. The first thing that stands out to me is that, RAW, those pacts need to be written on a scroll or a book bound in leather and lined with gold. Unless he's rolling up those "slips" between toothpicks, you got a shot at saying the contract's barely worth the paper on which it's written.

If you want to try something crazy, drown yourself. He has failed to provide you the promised benefits and has broken the contract. This can, of course, backfire, as he has not actually made any promise of benefits to you. But to that, I would claim that if he didn't promise benefits, he can't actually provide them, so the drowning yourself part wasn't really necessary, but I wanted to provide a stupid option.

If you want to throw the fourth wall to the wind, request for the source that details how a "Devil's Pact" works. Without actual game rules (and I suppose houserules, to be fair) to back up how this whole situation functions, all that has happened is fluff.

You could play ball with the favors he requests, and make it more troublesome for him to request favors than for him to do it yourself. "Butler for life, do me a favor and carry my bags for me," Dump out the bags and then carry them. "Do me a favor and put my stuff back in to the bags and carry my belongings for me," strip the tiefling nude because he's wearing some of his stuff and you need to get that in his bags as requested. "Just do me a favor and clean out the latrine," shovel it all into his knapsack. "Charge that wizard!" spend the rest of the battle writing up a bill to hand to the wizard for services rendered by the tiefling.

It has already been alluded to, but since your contract has no provision as to what will happen when the contract is violated, nothing bad can happen directly as a result of violating the contract. I mean, maybe he'll get angry at you and gank you in your sleep, maybe you'll get mugged by infernal-types, and maybe your DM will make you erase that "lawful" on your character sheet, but none of that is being provided by the contract in and of itself.

It comes to mind that, as worded, your contracts do not expire upon the Tiefling's death, so I would watch out if you're trying to get out of things that way. The lowball way of doing things would be to have him sign a contract for you should he end up in a similar life or death situation.

[olentu]

The obvious answer is to create a type of currency called a favor, valid for all debts public and private. Then whenever the tiefling asks for a favor you just shoot him in the face. Also the currency is a crossbow bolt.

[Psyren]

The obvious answer is to create a type of currency called a favor, valid for all debts public and private. Then whenever the tiefling asks for a favor you just shoot him in the face. Also the currency is a crossbow bolt.

Fecal smear optional.

[Hyena]

I am deeply amused how a faustian contract contains so many abusable loopholes.

[Slipperychicken]

I am deeply amused how a faustian contract contains so many abusable loopholes.

Yeah, contracts improperly written by moron PCs tend to be like that.

[Andezzar]

- Find out how many copies of the contract exist. Then destroy all of them or have someone else destroy them. The contract never says that this is not an allowed option to void the contract.

- Find out (preferably in game and without the tiefling's knowledge) how such pacts work. If you discover that you are not bound by that piece of paper, appear to be holding up your end of the contract. Then when the tiefling really needs a certain favor, refuse and let him suffer the consequences.

- Simply tell your teammates that the tiefling extorted a pact from you by threatening to let you drown. Let them sort it out.

[Telonius]

Plant some evidence that implicates him in an illegal activity. Be there during the arrest. The lawful authorities say that he's in a mess of trouble, and have just one question for both of you. Suggest that you're about to rat him out, and that if he doesn't call in his favor right now he's going to be executed. He calls in the favor, to ask you to cover for him.

Lawful authority: Okay, you first. Was your partner here guilty of the crime?
You: ... I can't say no.

[OldTrees1]

Take a lesson from the Fey.

The Fey have a weird favor based morality where they expect to owe/be owed a favor for any significantly helpful deed.

That is not so useful to your case but what is useful is how fey act if they feel they owe a mortal a favor. They push the mortal into situations where the mortal needs a favor so that they can absolve their debt.

TLDR: Get the Tiefling into trouble such that it has to call for a favor other than asking for more favors. Ideally the favors should be easy for you. (Like throwing a rope down when you pushed him into the convenient pit trap)

[Ekul]

If the exact wording is that you can't say no, you win. It doesn't say you cannot refuse, just that you can't "say no.". If he protests, advise him to make smarter pacts as a favour.

Worming your way out of pacts is par for the course when devils are involved.

[Rubik]

The obvious answer is to create a type of currency called a favor, valid for all debts public and private. Then whenever the tiefling asks for a favor you just shoot him in the face. Also the currency is a crossbow bolt.Party favors. I'm sure you can hit him on the head with your your pinata club as hard as you want, and if you do it right, he won't even be able to complain.

[OracleofWuffing]

Party favors. I'm sure you can hit him on the head with your your pinata club as hard as you want, and if you do it right, he won't even be able to complain.
As a bonus, free candy!

[Slipperychicken]

The obvious answer is to create a type of currency called a favor, valid for all debts public and private. Then whenever the tiefling asks for a favor you just shoot him in the face. Also the currency is a crossbow bolt.

You'd be doing him a favor by killing him, so I'd say that's enough.

[Rubik]

As a bonus, free candy!Break his head open and feast on the nougat center?

[Nettlekid]

Yeah, I support the idea that if the actual wording is "give a favor when asked," then your character is entirely able to give the Tiefling a copper piece when asked to sign more slips. No requirement to do THE favor asked of him.

Alternatively, sorry, but you're a Master of Nine! So...
You: "DM, is the Faustian Pact an ongoing effect that is actively acting on my character, as opposed to just being an idea?"
DM: "Yeah, it's a supernatural effect that's actually affecting you. You're compelled to do what he says."
You: "Okay, fair enough. Uh, but it's been going on for more than a round, hasn't it?"
DM: "Yeah, quite a while."
You: "Very good."
IRONHEARTSURGE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Feilith]

Suggestion:

Step 1: OOC tell the PC to balk off. Doing things like this is pretty dirty.
If successful, it's over.
If unsuccessful proceed to step 2.

Step 2: IC tell him that it's dirty and appeal to his alignment if he's good, or threaten him if he's evil.
If successful, its over.
If unsuccessful proceed to step 3

Step 3: IC bring him within an inch of death (disarm him while he's sleeping and beat him to death) and force him to considered your "favor" repaid in full. If you don't believe that you can take him, just mention in step 1 or 2 that you'll kill him, and then go through with it.

Honestly doing something like that isn't cool, but desperate times call for desperate measures.

[Unifel]

If your chaotic, ignore it. Its a benefit of that alignment axis
I'm Lawful Neutral :)

Yes, the DM shouldn't be able to force you to sign contracts against your will. Otherwise domination would be a way to get almost all souls to go to hell.
One thing I should note though, what prevents you from simply KILLING the devil? Like next time he shows up just stab him with a deadly maneuver. Or better yet, get a wizard or cleric to scry on you. Once the devil shows up have them all appear and then kill him together.
Well, my char isn't versed in devil contract rules, so she had no idea that she couldn't be forced to sign more, and thus signed more technically of her free will, right?
Also, we don't know what higher devil is making these contracts, and killing him he would just find a way to be resurrected. He kind of expects to die a lot, and has backup plans in place.

because the wording was you can't "tell anyone" your free to write it down on a dozen pieces of paper and leave them where a party member is sure to find. You could also argue that a telling a rock is not telling anyone so you aren't stopped from telling a rock what the PC did, if someone should happen to over hear what you told the rock, well you didn't tell them they were just eavesdropping.
Oh, this one sounds great xD

Another solution for getting other people to know is mind reading.
This one is also viable, as we have quite a couple wizards of similar level as me in our merc group

you have been supernaturally coerced to make that second deal, which means it has no effect
Wish my char knew that ;)

"Your favor is to do me 10 more favors" is bullcrap
Yeah, but as stated above my char doesnt know this stuff

"Hey, that dude made me sign a devilish pact when he tried to drown me*, he's obviously evil and we should kill him, I wish to wipe away the sins I had to do in order to stay alive."
Hey, it said you can't talk about the favor. Not that you can't talk about the pact. This Tiefling is a newb, you can handle him.
*He's an evil PC, it's not beyond his alignment to try to set you up.
Oh, it's highly unlikely he set me up. My character had to get into a situation where drowning was highly likely, and was the only one to not reach the portal out of the area before it closed, so i had to use his.
And I could tell one of the 6* leaders of our merc group about the Pact then? That's very nice.
*The tiefling is one of them... But there's also a Lawful Neutral Dwarf in there that'll convince the others to kick his ass

Since when have Tieflings had a supernatural racial ability which forces you to abide by contracts?
How many papers have you signed?
Never, he's probably got some deal set up with devils. He turned to Vecna a while ago and went completely insane, but we killed him, and when he was resurrected (Back up plans!) He wasn't insane anymore. And i've signed around 15, because he used the first to get me to sign that many others. For all intents and purposes though, it's infinite.

obviously made under duress?
Yeah but again, my char doesn't know the fine print of how these contracts work.

The obvious answer is to create a type of currency called a favor, valid for all debts public and private. Then whenever the tiefling asks for a favor you just shoot him in the face. Also the currency is a crossbow bolt.
Woah, would that work? Can my char just invent a currency and shoot him in the face? cause that's hilarious!

- Simply tell your teammates that the tiefling extorted a pact from you by threatening to let you drown. Let them sort it out.
Yeah i think this might be what I do. Tell the chair next to them aaallll about it

If the exact wording is that you can't say no, you win. It doesn't say you cannot refuse, just that you can't "say no.". If he protests, advise him to make smarter pacts as a favour.
haha, I like this one a lot too. "Hey, go fight that wizard for me!"
"Sure!" *Stabs tiefling in neck*
I dont think my char would do that though, no matter how much I'd love to xD

Alternatively, sorry, but you're a Master of Nine! So...
You: "DM, is the Faustian Pact an ongoing effect that is actively acting on my character, as opposed to just being an idea?"
DM: "Yeah, it's a supernatural effect that's actually affecting you. You're compelled to do what he says."
You: "Okay, fair enough. Uh, but it's been going on for more than a round, hasn't it?"
DM: "Yeah, quite a while."
You: "Very good."
Seriously, that works? I'm right in between level ups, so that would be a super easy way to get out of it!

Step 1: OOC tell the PC to balk off. Doing things like this is pretty dirty.
If successful, it's over.
If unsuccessful proceed to step 2.
Done this one, unsuccessful

Step 2: IC tell him that it's dirty and appeal to his alignment if he's good, or threaten him if he's evil.
If successful, its over.
If unsuccessful proceed to step 3
I'm pretty sure he legitimately thinks he's invincible, and threats will do nothing...

Step 3: IC bring him within an inch of death (disarm him while he's sleeping and beat him to death) and force him to considered your "favor" repaid in full. If you don't believe that you can take him, just mention in step 1 or 2 that you'll kill him, and then go through with it.
Well this is viable, but I don't think I'd do it cause my character does believe she owes him a favor, but by her code, she owes him *one* and all the others are him exploiting. So after the one, she'll perform some of the ways to break out described above.


Thanks a bunch guys, This was super helpful! I knew turning to GITP would work :D

[Kuulvheysoon]

Seriously, that works? I'm right in between level ups, so that would be a super easy way to get out of it!

Yeah, welcome to the hilariously badly-worded text for Iron Heart Surge. It's fantastic in it's ridiculousness.

Normally, I'd say to be reasonable about it, but considering how badly the Tiefling screwed you (especially because it's another player)? I'd be very disappointed in your DM if he didn't let you get away with it.

[Rubik]

If you killed him using a weapon made of thinaun (from Complete Warrior, I think), his soul would remain in the weapon when he's killed, and he'd be rendered unraisable. I think the only way to get him out of it intact is to kill something else with the weapon (which displaces his soul with the new one) or to cast a Wish to pull him out. Hire someone with the Consecrate Spell feat to cast such a spell using his soul as a material component. It'll knock off some of the XP cost AND be both a Good and Evil spell, for a grand total of Neutral. And since that would destroy his soul for *good...




*and evil

[kabreras]

Well this is viable, but I don't think I'd do it cause my character does believe she owes him a favor, but by her code, she owes him *one* and all the others are him exploiting. So after the one, she'll perform some of the ways to break out described above.



No characters can be that stupid, if she just think but is not bound by any real magic she just wont do it and tell the thiefling to go take classes in the nines hell.

[Andezzar]

Yeah i think this might be what I do. Tell the chair next to them aaallll about itYou can even tell it to their faces. The pact only forces you not to disclose the favor. You can say whatever you want about the fact that you have a pact with the tiefling.


I'm pretty sure he legitimately thinks he's invincible, and threats will do nothing...Then you have to cure him of this delusion. BTW is the Tiefling an NPC or another PC?

[Kuulvheysoon]

You can even tell it to their faces. The pact only forces you not to disclose the favor. You can say whatever you want about the fact that you have a pact with the tiefling.

Then you have to cure him of this delusion. BTW is the Tiefling an NPC or another PC?


So my predicament is simple. In my campaign (we switch around DM's, so sometimes i'm DM and sometimes other people are) my character is a swordsage 16 / Master of Nine 2. A tiefling PC made me sign a devil pact that I would give him one favor in order to save me from drowning, and I grudgingly agreed. The wording: "I, (insert full name here) must give (Tiefling's full name) a favor when asked, and I cannot say no, and I cannot tell anyone about this favor."
The favor he made me do, which I didn't think was possible at the time, was to make me sign more similar slips. So he basically owns my character now. I'm trying to find a loophole to break this, or at least let the other PCs know what's going on, because this Tiefling is already treading the line between friend and foe pretty closely and the other PCs might actually attack him if they knew, freeing me if he died.
Any ideas? Or should I resign to a life of servitude?

In the OP, yo. :smallbiggrin:

[lord_khaine]

Do tell how it play's out, the playground loves a happy ending :smallbiggrin:

[soveliss24]

... "Charge that wizard!" spend the rest of the battle writing up a bill to hand to the wizard for services rendered by the tiefling...


Yeah, I support the idea that if the actual wording is "give a favor when asked," then your character is entirely able to give the Tiefling a copper piece when asked to sign more slips. No requirement to do THE favor asked of him.

Alternatively, sorry, but you're a Master of Nine! So...
You: "DM, is the Faustian Pact an ongoing effect that is actively acting on my character, as opposed to just being an idea?"
DM: "Yeah, it's a supernatural effect that's actually affecting you. You're compelled to do what he says."
You: "Okay, fair enough. Uh, but it's been going on for more than a round, hasn't it?"
DM: "Yeah, quite a while."
You: "Very good."
IRONHEARTSURGE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Both of these caused enough laughter to prevent me reading on for some time. Well done.

OT, I'd say the plan to perform the one favor the character feels she legitimately owes the Tiefling and then break out of the others is excellent. Good roleplaying without messing your character up too badly.

[Lesser Naboo]

I'd recommend against using Iron Heart Surge. The DM could veto that. The loophole stuff is still good.
You mention that you guys switch DMs. If you do this while he's DM, he might (I suspect, will) veto loophole abuse. If you do it while you're DM, he might accuse you of abusing authority. Of course, in either situation, your group might intervene. I don't know. Just something I thought of.

[Kuulvheysoon]

I'd recommend against using Iron Heart Surge. The DM could veto that. The loophole stuff is still good.
You mention that you guys switch DMs. If you do this while he's DM, he might (I suspect, will) veto loophole abuse. If you do it while you're DM, he might accuse you of abusing authority. Of course, in either situation, your group might intervene. I don't know. Just something I thought of.

Honestly, I wouldn't be too worried about that, especially if he only abused the wording to get out of this... situation. I mean, look at how permissive he's being of the Tiefling character.

[Lesser Naboo]

Honestly, I wouldn't be too worried about that, especially if he only abused the wording to get out of this... situation. I mean, look at how permissive he's being of the Tiefling character.
That is a good point.
Also, have you talked to the other players about this? I assume they know about it OOC. You might be able to get them to tell the tiefling's player to knock it off, since it's inhibiting your enjoyment.

[olentu]

Fecal smear optional.

I suppose that could indicate denomination.


Woah, would that work? Can my char just invent a currency and shoot him in the face? cause that's hilarious!

Well the DM could always veto the idea but it sounds like the other PC has received quite a bit of leeway so it wouldn't hurt to try.

[Unifel]

No characters can be that stupid, if she just think but is not bound by any real magic she just wont do it and tell the thiefling to go take classes in the nines hell.
You misunderstand, I didn't mean a magical favor. Just a "he saved my life, gotta give him something in return" type thing

You can even tell it to their faces. The pact only forces you not to disclose the favor. You can say whatever you want about the fact that you have a pact with the tiefling.
Ohh, right :)

I'd recommend against using Iron Heart Surge. The DM could veto that.
Yeah, I think whoever is DM at the time would. I already told one of the other players and he said was way OP and no way it would be allowed xD

might accuse you of abusing authority.
He's pretty much the only one who does that... His changeling character is the leader of a world wide thief guild and this Tiefling char has a paragon-ish level Half-elf half-drow that's god touched and has killed at least 5 gods in our knowledge on his side... I feel i'm entitled to a little bit of authority abuse ;)

Also, have you talked to the other players about this? I assume they know about it OOC. You might be able to get them to tell the tiefling's player to knock it off, since it's inhibiting your enjoyment.
Yeah, our current plan is to talk a bit OOC about not being an ass, then if he doesnt get it we're going to permanently destroy his Tiefling. We're thinking murder while asleep followed by bind the soul cast by one of our character's who's a Neutral Lich wizard ^.^

[Rubik]

You misunderstand, I didn't mean a magical favor. Just a "he saved my life, gotta give him something in return" type thing

Ohh, right :)

Yeah, I think whoever is DM at the time would. I already told one of the other players and he said was way OP and no way it would be allowed xD

He's pretty much the only one who does that... His changeling character is the leader of a world wide thief guild and this Tiefling char has a paragon-ish level Half-elf half-drow that's god touched and has killed at least 5 gods in our knowledge on his side... I feel i'm entitled to a little bit of authority abuse ;)

Yeah, our current plan is to talk a bit OOC about not being an ass, then if he doesnt get it we're going to permanently destroy his Tiefling. We're thinking murder while asleep followed by bind the soul cast by one of our character's who's a Neutral Lich wizard ^.^As I mentioned earlier, 10,000 gp will give you a thinaun blade to coup de grace him with. Shove it through his eye while he's asleep. One quick soul-as-a-material-component spell later, and he's gone permanently.

[Unifel]

As I mentioned earlier, 10,000 gp will give you a thinaun blade to coup de grace him with. Shove it through his eye while he's asleep. One quick soul-as-a-material-component spell later, and he's gone permanently.

What spells use Souls as material components? I've got like 70ish books but I haven't looked in all of them and so i've never even heard of that O.o

[Rubik]

What spells use Souls as material components? I've got like 70ish books but I haven't looked in all of them and so i've never even heard of that O.oThe Book of Vile Darkness allows you to add a soul as a material component to offset XP costs. I believe it's 10 XP per soul. It doesn't even require extra preparation -- you just need the soul handy.

Use him on the dinkiest spell you can think of, then (in character) say it's more than what he deserved.

[AuraTwilight]

You've obviously never looked at the Book of Vile Darkness.

[Grollub]

I think i would start off with the suggestion of telling everyone else in the party bout the contract... as that is not stipulated in the contract.

if the party doesn't do anything to help you... move up the chain.. talk to the merc group you are part of.

if he also dm.. and screwing you over vetoing everything to get out of this... just wait til your dm.. and make up yer own way out.

[Sith_Happens]

What spells use Souls as material components? I've got like 70ish books but I haven't looked in all of them and so i've never even heard of that O.o

Any of them. Book of Vile Darkness page 45.

EDIT: Master of Nine'd.

[Unifel]

The Book of Vile Darkness allows you to add a soul as a material component to offset XP costs. I believe it's 10 XP per soul. It doesn't even require extra preparation -- you just need the soul handy.

Use him on the dinkiest spell you can think of, then (in character) say it's more than what he deserved.

Oh man, that's great xD
Thanks man, I'll definitely do that then

[Nettlekid]

The Book of Vile Darkness allows you to add a soul as a material component to offset XP costs. I believe it's 10 XP per soul. It doesn't even require extra preparation -- you just need the soul handy.

Use him on the dinkiest spell you can think of, then (in character) say it's more than what he deserved.

Close, it's that each soul saves 10 XP on an item you create. Not spells with XP costs.

But this is a Tiefling. Do they have souls? I thought they had the whole non-duality thing.

[Unifel]

Close, it's that each soul saves 10 XP on an item you create. Not spells with XP costs.

But this is a Tiefling. Do they have souls? I thought they had the whole non-duality thing.

Wait Tieflings don't have souls? Then can they even be resurrected once they die?? How does that work?

[Sith_Happens]

Close, it's that each soul saves 10 XP on an item you create. Not spells with XP costs.

You can, however, use the soul as an optional material component when casting a spell to get +10 to your spell resistance roll.


But this is a Tiefling. Do they have souls? I thought they had the whole non-duality thing.

They're native outsiders, which means they can be raised from the dead, though I suppose that doesn't necessarily imply a body-soul duality.

[Andezzar]

But this is a Tiefling. Do they have souls? I thought they had the whole non-duality thing.Tieflings are native Outsiders:
A subtype applied only to outsiders. These creatures have mortal ancestors or a strong connection to the Material Plane and can be raised, reincarnated, or resurrected just as other living creatures can be. Creatures with this subtype are native to the Material Plane (hence the subtype’s name). Unlike true outsiders, native outsiders need to eat and sleep.AFAIK you need a soul to be raised/resurrected.

[Kire_Nessumsar]

Now I don't know the rules about infernal contracts like that. Put how does it work? If it's with the/a devil don't said devil take your/his soul in return? If so why would he take your soul again, it's already his. If it's with another devil wouldnt they be pissed to be cheated of said soul or would they even know that the soul isnt contracted to another devil?

[Rubik]

Now I don't know the rules about infernal contracts like that. Put how does it work? If it's with the/a devil don't said devil take your/his soul in return? If so why would he take your soul again, it's already his. If it's with another devil wouldnt they be pissed to be cheated of said soul or would they even know that the soul isnt contracted to another devil?Part of the point with devils is that they don't usually respect the spirit of the law, but rather its wording. If you can subvert a badly-worded contract by fulfilling the letter but not the spirit and screwing over someone else in the process to your own gain, it's usually something to be respected -- at least, by everyone but the one you screwed over.

[Andezzar]

Now I don't know the rules about infernal contracts like that. Put how does it work? If it's with the/a devil don't said devil take your/his soul in return? If so why would he take your soul again, it's already his. If it's with another devil wouldnt they be pissed to be cheated of said soul or would they even know that the soul isnt contracted to another devil?Exchanging the soul for power/riches/whatever is only one form of infernal contracts. The contract can contain whatever both parties agree on. But AFAIK such contracts also need to be signed in blood. So if the OP used ink he is safe. Better check that though in Fiendish Folio or Fiendish Codex II.

[Khatoblepas]

Close, it's that each soul saves 10 XP on an item you create. Not spells with XP costs.

That opens up a whole new set of humiliations his soul can go through. Try making a Wand of Prestidigitation, and give it to a local inn. They can use it to clean up.

If only you could use it in Beget Bogun.

Honestly, this guy sounds like he's immature and tripping on a power fantasy. Killing five gods? What level ARE you playing at?

[Rubik]

That opens up a whole new set of humiliations his soul can go through. Try making a Wand of Prestidigitation, and give it to a local inn. They can use it to clean up.Not a local inn. A local brothel.

[Unifel]

So if the OP used ink he is safe.
Oh, yeah, I used Ink.
So what you're saying is there is absolutely no problem and all I have to do is let the group know, followed by murdering and destroying the Tiefling's soul?
haha, I should have known he wouldn't do his research

[Unifel]

That opens up a whole new set of humiliations his soul can go through. Try making a Wand of Prestidigitation, and give it to a local inn. They can use it to clean up.

If only you could use it in Beget Bogun.

Honestly, this guy sounds like he's immature and tripping on a power fantasy. Killing five gods? What level ARE you playing at?

Oh, players are currently 18
but there's an NPC that's at least level 30 (who performed the god-killing aforementioned) that *apparently* owes his char something. So yeah I'm trying to teach him to stop letting DMing powers go to his head and destroying his "cheated" character.
And i am definitely doing that xD

[tyckspoon]

Oh, yeah, I used Ink.
So what you're saying is there is absolutely no problem and all I have to do is let the group know, followed by murdering and destroying the Tiefling's soul?
haha, I should have known he wouldn't do his research

Oh, yeah. Your typical fiendish contract is a very serious thing - they're written by people whose entire culture is based on legalism and the niceties of exactly what you are and aren't allowed to do based on the exact words used in their laws/contracts with each other/mortals/pretty much everything. Also, they're magical. A guy who just gives you a two-sentence slip of paper and says 'here, sign this wouldja'? He's opening himself up to all kinds of abuse and slipperiness with his lack of care about what he actually asks of you, and unless he has the personal power to weave a Geas or something into those papers his 'Devil's Contract' is no more binding than a promise to Joe McPigstink the Commoner 1 Dirt Farmer. (Which is to say your character may feel compelled to honor it, but that's because it's the way your character would act and not a magical force acting on you or waiting to punish you for breach of contract.)

[Arkhosia]

Preparations:
Find a way to learn the "blood" thing in-game
Buy a thinaun sword, get it buffed, and name it A Favor.

Confront the PC and tell him the fact the contract is void. If he protests, slay him with A Favor and then put it in his hand when you kill him. You gave him a favor.
Then use his soul to make a wand of presdignation and give it to a brothel.

[Unifel]

Oh, yeah. Your typical fiendish contract is a very serious thing - they're written by people whose entire culture is based on legalism and the niceties of exactly what you are and aren't allowed to do based on the exact words used in their laws/contracts with each other/mortals/pretty much everything. Also, they're magical. A guy who just gives you a two-sentence slip of paper and says 'here, sign this wouldja'? He's opening himself up to all kinds of abuse and slipperiness with his lack of care about what he actually asks of you, and unless he has the personal power to weave a Geas or something into those papers his 'Devil's Contract' is no more binding than a promise to Joe McPigstink the Commoner 1 Dirt Farmer. (Which is to say your character may feel compelled to honor it, but that's because it's the way your character would act and not a magical force acting on you or waiting to punish you for breach of contract.)

Sweet :biggrin:
Then I guess this discussion is done. I'll post something in a few days, week at most, about how it went if anyone wants to know :)
Thanks for all the help guys!

[Andezzar]

Then use his soul to make a wand of presdignation and give it to a brothel.Make it an eternal wand. Normal wands are done after 50 cleanings.

[Arkhosia]

Make it an eternal wand. Normal wands are done after 50 cleanings.
That's a good idea!
Actually, it should be a wand of vibration!
:belkar:

[eviljav]

Easy fixes:

The chaotic view - if he doesn't have sufficient power to force you to obey the contract contract, then it's not valid. And if he does have sufficient power, then he doesn't need a contract.

The Vader: "I have altered the deal. Pray I do not alter it further."

The easy way: Have your character change his name. The contract was signed "so and so will bla bla bla", doesn't bind someone who isn't "so and so".

Or murder his character in his sleep...

[Lord Vukodlak]

Easy fixes:

The chaotic view - if he doesn't have sufficient power to force you to obey the contract contract, then it's not valid. And if he does have sufficient power, then he doesn't need a contract.

The Vader: "I have altered the deal. Pray I do not alter it further."

The easy way: Have your character change his name. The contract was signed "so and so will bla bla bla", doesn't bind someone who isn't "so and so".

Or murder his character in his sleep...
Except for the murdering him, none of those would work.

[Rubik]

If you magically compel yourself to sign an infernal contract, does it still count as magical compulsion that renders the signature invalid?

[Lord Vukodlak]

If you magically compel yourself to sign an infernal contract, does it still count as magical compulsion that renders the signature invalid?

Well yes because you willfully put a compulsion on yourself to sign the contract. If on the other hand you put a compulsion on yourself to Obey Mr. X and Mr. X orders you to sign the contract then it should be invalid because you only signed because of the compulsion.

[Envyus]

Also just for minimum effort on your part. Once you in character find out the contract is null and void due to not having it signed right. If you can contact a higher ranking Devil and reveal that he botched the contract they will deal with him for you.

When a devil screws up like he did the most common punishment is demotion into a least devil. His boss would turn the Teifling into a nupperibo http://samlib.ru/img/h/hrenow_r/wneshnieplany/baatezu.nupperibo.jpg

Being turned into one involves pain,and body being horribly deformed. Also his ability to see, talk, hear, smell and think would be removed (mainly because a Nupperibo's brain is ripped out.) Then he would be sent off to act as cannon fodder in the blood war.

This would save you the trouble of having to kill him and destroy his soul as his bosses would do it for you.

[Zanos]

The Book of Vile Darkness allows you to add a soul as a material component to offset XP costs. I believe it's 10 XP per soul. It doesn't even require extra preparation -- you just need the soul handy.

Use him on the dinkiest spell you can think of, then (in character) say it's more than what he deserved.
I highly recommend against this for two reasons.
1. Destroying a soul is the act of the blackest sort in D&D. It is literally the worst single act you can possibly commit. If your DM knows anything about this your alignment will(and should) immediately drop to evil, and the lower planes while have claim to your characters soul anyway.
2. This player is an ass, but destroying a characters soul kind of is too.

I recommend any number of loophole options. Again, the pact has all sorts of flaws that allow you to discuss it with someone. Inform the next cleric or competent sage of the pact, and they should be able to get you out of it fairly quickly with their mad ranks in KN: Religion or KN: The Planes.

[BlasphemousSlug]

This novice deal-maker may have accidentally developed the best scheme for coercing pacts that I've ever heard. The first contract was invalid because it was made under duress, and therefore had no supernatural backing. The signer of said contract wouldn't know that the contract is invalid though. So when the deal-maker calls on the (better worded) first contract to get the victim to sign others, they aren't being compelled. This give me an idea... :smallamused:

What if a devil kidnaps a merchants family, tells him that he has to sign a contract or his family dies. This contract is invalid because it was made under duress, but the merchant doesn't know that. Then the devil calls on the first contract to get the merchant to sign others. When the merchant refuses, the devil leaves and a minion casts bestow curse on the merchant without him knowing the source. The curse wouldn't be one of the ones listed, just something cosmetic like being covered in boils and pustules, or always reeking like a sewer. A week later, the devil returns and lifts the curse, explaining that the contract cursed him for breaking it. The merchant then realizes how unpleasant a curse can be, and decides to sign a contract with the devil, and this time its real.

The only problem with the plan is that some might see the threat of the curse as being under duress. Under duress is a vague term though, and open to interpretation. I would consider duress to be bodily harm to him or his loved ones. The curse bestowed though would just be something unpleasant, something the merchant wishes to avoid, but he wouldn't be in fear of his life. I would say that that would mean the real contract wasn't made under duress and is therefore completely valid and damning. Plus the devil gets a soul without having to give away anything! :smallbiggrin:

[Unifel]

Also just for minimum effort on your part. Once you in character find out the contract is null and void due to not having it signed right. If you can contact a higher ranking Devil and reveal that he botched the contract they will deal with him for you.

When a devil screws up like he did the most common punishment is demotion into a least devil. His boss would turn the Teifling into a nupperibo http://samlib.ru/img/h/hrenow_r/wneshnieplany/baatezu.nupperibo.jpg

Being turned into one involves pain,and body being horribly deformed. Also his ability to see, talk, hear, smell and think would be removed (mainly because a Nupperibo's brain is ripped out.) Then he would be sent off to act as cannon fodder in the blood war.

This would save you the trouble of having to kill him and destroy his soul as his bosses would do it for you.

Woah. That's insane! Definitely gonna try and find a way to have that happen :smallamused:

EDIT: I might have forgotten to mention that while my character IS lawful Neutral, She is also a tad bit... unhinged... Leading her to sometimes perform unlawful or unneutral acts when emotions run high. This is one of those times where she's pretty emotional, and might just destroy his soul :smalleek:
But she'd probably go for the Nupperibo thing cause it's more torture/humiliating and she's angry as hell

[Invader]

You can tell a tree and is not your fault if someone else overhears you speaking. I'd say this is exactly the kind of rules a devil would follow to break an agreement he made with someone.

Remember, always follow the letter of the law, not the spirit.

[Andezzar]

I highly recommend against this for two reasons.
1. Destroying a soul is the act of the blackest sort in D&D. It is literally the worst single act you can possibly commit. If your DM knows anything about this your alignment will(and should) immediately drop to evil, and the lower planes while have claim to your characters soul anyway.So what? The occasional evil act will not shift the alignment to evil any more than an occasional good act will make a character good. Even if it does, Behavior determines alignment, alignment does not dictate behavior. So he will be non-evil in short order.

Since the character is neither a paladin nor a divine caster, an alignment change has zero impact on his character (unless he has the wrong maneuvers).

Also, unless you have some kind of compulsion to commit evil acts (Lycanthropy, Helmet of opposite alignment), having an evil alignment can even be beneficial. Most monsters the typical adventuring group faces have abilities designed to work against good characters. Very few have abilities specifically geared towards evil characters. Those usually can be reasoned with unless of course the DM plays angels ans similar beings as chaotic/lawful stupid.


2. This player is an ass, but destroying a characters soul kind of is too.I disagree, it is an effective way of eliminating a threat that at least has claimed to be able to come back from the dead.

@Invader: We have already established that, even if the contract is binding, the character is free to talk about the pact, he is just prohibited to talk about the favor.

[hamishspence]

So what? The occasional evil act will not shift the alignment to evil any more than an occasional good act will make a character good.

DMG mentions that while this is a general principle, there are exceptions.

[Psyren]

So what? The occasional evil act will not shift the alignment to evil any more than an occasional good act will make a character good. Even if it does, Behavior determines alignment, alignment does not dictate behavior. So he will be non-evil in short order.

1) A heinous enough act can indeed shift your alignment in one swoop. Murder for instance.

2) The kind of person who is capable of committing acts like that could not possibly be good. Perhaps Neutral, but a good person would never consider actually devouring a soul like that.

3) Souls can only be used that way for magic item construction, not spells.

[Mystral]

From what I remember, a devils contract is only valid when you sign it under your own will and not under a magical compulsion or something similiar. Otherwise, devils would just go around charming people and making them sell their sole for a cinnamon bun, which would be very much not lawfull.

[Andezzar]

1) A heinous enough act can indeed shift your alignment in one swoop. Murder for instance.Maybe. This however would make nearly all adventurers evil. They are killing sentient beings for personal gain. Going into a dungeon that is not yours and killing its inhabitants can in no way be justified as self-defense.


2) The kind of person who is capable of committing acts like that could not possibly be good. Perhaps Neutral, but a good person would never consider actually devouring a soul like that.The OP's character is Lawful Neutral.


3) Souls can only be used that way for magic item construction, not spells.I did not dispute that.


From what I remember, a devils contract is only valid when you sign it under your own will and not under a magical compulsion or something similiar. Otherwise, devils would just go around charming people and making them sell their sole for a cinnamon bun, which would be very much not lawfull.Good old blackmail/extortion is no magical compulsion.

[Rubik]

I highly recommend against this for two reasons.
1. Destroying a soul is the act of the blackest sort in D&D. It is literally the worst single act you can possibly commit. If your DM knows anything about this your alignment will(and should) immediately drop to evil, and the lower planes while have claim to your characters soul anyway.1.) But killing Evil creatures sends their souls to the Evil outer planes, which strengthens those planes and makes Evil stronger. Destroying an Evil soul therefore prevents Evil from getting stronger and is therefore a good (if not Good) act.

2.) Using the soul to strengthen a Consecrated spell (adding both the [Evil] descriptor and the [Good] descriptor) is also a Good act, and is therefore at least Neutral.

3.) Alignments are frequently stupid anyway. I can think of several ways to destroy souls that result in the universe at large being a better place, the destruction of Evil souls and Elder Evils being merely two.


2. This player is an ass, but destroying a characters soul kind of is too.Fight fire with fire, I say.

[Psyren]

1.) But killing Evil creatures sends their souls to the Evil outer planes, which strengthens those planes and makes Evil stronger. Destroying an Evil soul therefore prevents Evil from getting stronger and is therefore a good (if not Good) act.

This implies that redemption is always impossible, a concept that Good considers to be anathema. Anything that isn't a fiend can be redeemed.



2.) Using the soul to strengthen a Consecrated spell (adding both the [Evil] descriptor and the [Good] descriptor) is also a Good act, and is therefore at least Neutral.

While casting a [Good][Evil] spell would indeed even out, doing this this also causes the soul's destruction, which is "blackest evil." So the net result would be Evil, not Neutral, even using this kind of "morality math."



3.) Alignments are frequently stupid anyway.

This is a legitimate complaint but is not RAW.


Maybe. This however would make nearly all adventurers evil. They are killing sentient beings for personal gain. Going into a dungeon that is not yours and killing its inhabitants can in no way be justified as self-defense.

That depends highly on circumstance, so you need an example. "Adventuring" is far too vague for discussion of this nature.



The OP's character is Lawful Neutral.

Right, so he is neutral before consuming souls.

[hamishspence]

This implies that redemption is always impossible, a concept that Good considers to be anathema. Anything that isn't a fiend can be redeemed.

And there's a few mentions of redeemed fiends out there, as well.

[Alex12]

Who says you have to destroy the soul? It's stuck in the weapon, it's not going anywhere, just stash it away somewhere. Or give it to an appropriate church.
"This weapon contains the soul of a being that sold his soul to fiends for power. He claimed that his benefactors would raise him from the dead if he passed, and so we had to take some precautions."

[Rubik]

This implies that redemption is always impossible, a concept that Good considers to be anathema. Anything that isn't a fiend can be redeemed.Considering that paladins are forbidden from even trying, the universal concept of Good (which is where paladins gain their powers) apparently considers it a waste of time, at best.

And do note that the character in question is a tiefling, and is therefore a fiend.


While casting a [Good][Evil] spell would indeed even out, doing this this also causes the soul's destruction, which is "blackest evil." So the net result would be Evil, not Neutral, even using this kind of "morality math."I do believe intent would win out, here, since the fiend in question has a great many contingencies in place to prevent his destruction, and he's actively working towards evil ends (and apparently does so willingly, to the point of assisting with the destruction of goodly gods). His destruction is certainly justified, especially since the intent is to prevent him from coming back, which has otherwise proven all but impossible so far.

Even subverting his alignment would apparently be a lost cause, since he seems to revert to his pre-altered condition every time he dies.

Desperate times call for desperate measures.


This is a legitimate complaint but is not RAW.This is true. However, RAW says that Deathwatch is [Evil], even though there's no possible use of the spell that, by itself, is evil. It merely grants you harmless information. RAW can be quite retarded, as I'm sure you know.

[hamishspence]

And do note that the character in question is a tiefling, and is therefore a fiend.

Technically not- to be a Fiend, an outsider must have the Evil subtype- which tieflings do not.

[Psyren]

Considering that paladins are forbidden from even trying

Given that Paladins can't even cast Atonement, using them as an example isn't very realistic anyway.

Also, while Paladins are forbidden from associating, you don't need to adventure alongside someone to redeem them; and anyway, Good clerics (i.e. the folks who can actually redeem) don't have any such prohibition.



And do note that the character in question is a tiefling, and is therefore a fiend.

No, Fiends are evil-subtyped outsiders. While Tieflings are outsiders, and may even have evil alignments, that is not enough to make them true fiends.



This is true. However, RAW says that Deathwatch is [Evil], even though there's no possible use of the spell that, by itself, is evil. It merely grants you harmless information. RAW can be quite retarded, as I'm sure you know.

We're on the same page here certainly.

[hamishspence]

I blame Monte Cook in this case- it was him that recommended Deathwatch be updated to have the evil subtype in BoVD (3.0)- and in 3.5, it was changed, to have it.

[Rubik]

For your purposes, make your weapon a thinaun light pick made for two hands (using Savage Species -- it costs nothing if the weapon is already masterwork). Polymorph several party members (preferably with Power Attack) into a super-strong form (like a war troll) and have them all CdG the bastard while he's sleeping, right in the eye, using a swift action to pass the pick around, so everyone gets their CdG in the round before the tiefling can wake up. If he isn't dead by the end of the first round and his soul isn't in the pick, something's gone wrong.

[Envyus]

I already brought up just reporting him to his boss which will deal with all the problems right away.

[Slipperychicken]

I already brought up just reporting him to his boss which will deal with all the problems right away.

Just hope the DM doesn't get the idea of having you deal with Hell's Automated Customer Service Hotline.

[Dissonance]

I think your all missing an important weak link to the contract.

It just says that he can't "say no." nowhere does it he he "can't refuse." since the former can be interpreted and applied to just saying the word "no". He can refuse any favor asked of him. He just can't say the word "no."

[Alex12]

I think your all missing an important weak link to the contract.

It just says that he can't "say no." nowhere does it he he "can't refuse." since the former can be interpreted and applied to just saying the word "no". He can refuse any favor asked of him. He just can't say the word "no."

It could also stretch to using words with "no" in them, like "I will not" or even "Yes, I know what you want"
"I refuse" is, however, perfectly viable, as is a stabbing.

[Envyus]

Still reporting him to Pit Fiend will solve all the problems as Hell is very strict about the rules.

[Arkhosia]

Just hope the DM doesn't get the idea of having you deal with Hell's Automated Customer Service Hotline.

They play nickelback for the hold music.

[TheYell]

I think your all missing an important weak link to the contract.

It just says that he can't "say no." nowhere does it he he "can't refuse." since the former can be interpreted and applied to just saying the word "no". He can refuse any favor asked of him. He just can't say the word "no."

BINGO. As written the contract requires him to affirm a favor in secret. It does not bind him to perform the favor.

There may be outside considerations binding him, but it's not in the contract.

[TheYell]

You could also sell a horse to a tavernkeeper and ask the barkeep to sign a paper saying "I accept a horse from X and in lieu of coin agree to be liable for his obligations". But then you'd be eeeevil.

[Slipperychicken]

2.) Using the soul to strengthen a Consecrated spell (adding both the [Evil] descriptor and the [Good] descriptor) is also a Good act, and is therefore at least Neutral.


AFAIK, descriptors don't cancel out. It's both an Evil and Good act to cast the spell that way. You'd have consequences for both Evil and Good actions. It's like how you can have [Fire] and [Cold] on the same spell.

[Souju]

If his favor was to just have you sign other slips, then your favor is over. So what if you signed the other ones? You were supernaturally compelled to sign the contracts, which voids them.
However, he doesn't know that. So you have a rare chance...an EXQUISITE chance...to truly **** with him as revenge. Cuz he'll always have his guard down around you.

[Kuulvheysoon]

They play nickelback for the hold music.

No, they play Celine Dion.

[Rubik]

No, they play Celine Dion.Hell hath no fury...

No, wait. I don't even think the hells would be that evil.

[Arkhosia]

Hell hath no fury...

No, wait. I don't even think the hells would be that evil.

I thought they would be civilized! :smalleek:
That is why I advocate the "Damn your friend" route!

[Envyus]

So has anything come out of this.

[John Longarrow]

Unifel,

When the entire party is together, just ask the tiefling "Do you want to redeem one of your devilish favors by having me give you a back rub? One of the fifteen you compelled me to sign after making me agree to a favor when I was drowning?"

Nothing in the contract prohibits you from asking the tiefling a question about it. You are also not, technically, telling the party. You are simply asking a question.

A fun piece of RP may be to have your character spend some time away from the group learning law. Take a few ranks in profession (Lawyer). This could allow you lots of fun with dealing with a contract...

[Zomg Zombies]

Another idea is to find a Truenamer http://dndtools.eu/classes/truenamer/ have them change your name, now all those contracts are invalid; not the teifling would know. Or next time he refreshes his favor contract whip out a pen and start drawing addendum that plant things back in your side

With the soul idea, rather than making an eternal wand of Prestidigitation, use the soul to craft an Effigy of a flumph.

[Unifel]

Forgot to post the update on what happened, so here it is:
He said that it was a Pact Insidious, and he said it WAS signed in blood using the argument: "At the time I didn't know it needed to be signed in blood, but my char would have, just like when you roll your hide check it's not actually you trying to hide, it uses your char's knowledge" which I agreed with. Pact Insidious does not anywhere state that the signer can't be coerced, magically or not, which means that the pacts *ARE* legal. Thus, my character is stuck doing random **** *cough, stuff* for him as he asks due to the fact that the party voted not to kill him unless he does something like this again. I've got a new character now, a Binder. Oh well, I like him better anyway :smallbiggrin:

[Rubik]

I still say you should've done everything you could to mess with him.

[olentu]

Hmm, what kind of pact insidious was he talking about, by the way. The description that you gave does not seem to match the pact insidious described in the fiendish codex II and I am wondering where the one your group was using came from.

[Unifel]

I still say you should've done everything you could to mess with him.

Oh I plan to "misinterpret" absolutely EVERYTHING
But besides that there's not much I can do :smallannoyed:


Hmm, what kind of pact insidious was he talking about, by the way. The description that you gave does not seem to match the pact insidious described in the fiendish codex II and I am wondering where the one your group was using came from.

Fiendish Codex II page 24, paragraphs 2-5:

"In a Pact Insidious, a devil promises to provide certain benefits for a mortal signatory in exchange for specified reciprocal favors. It does not explicitly bind the mortal’s soul to Baator, nor does it require a statement of allegiance to any particular archdevil.
From the devil’s point of view, such a pact is still an exercise in damnation—it is merely sneakier than a Pact Certain. A Pact Insidious allows a gullible mortal to believe he can gain the benefi ts of a fl irtation with evil without suffering its consequences. Thus, it exploits the eternal self-delusion of the lazy and greedy.
A contract of this type is written to deliver its promises in stages. To reap the next stage of benefits, the signatory must perform a new service for the devil. A fool who signs such a bargain rarely notices until it is too late that each service incrementally nudges him toward eternal damnation. Each task specified by a Pact Insidious is a corrupt act (see page 30). Hidden provisions in the contract revoke the previous benefi ts if the mortal stops performing the specified tasks.
Strict prohibitions forbid the mortal from disclosing the contents of the agreement to any third party. Though the contract does not explicitly say so, these prohibitions are meant to keep mortals away from meddlesome priests, who can perform atonement spells to absolve repentant signatories of the sins they have accumulated while fulfilling the terms of the contract."
He said his was a "One Stage" type, with one benefit for one act/price. (Saving my life for a favor, and he's giving me small benefits as he calls on each paper)

[olentu]

Fiendish Codex II page 24, paragraphs 2-5:

"In a Pact Insidious, a devil promises to provide certain benefits for a mortal signatory in exchange for specified reciprocal favors. It does not explicitly bind the mortal’s soul to Baator, nor does it require a statement of allegiance to any particular archdevil.
From the devil’s point of view, such a pact is still an exercise in damnation—it is merely sneakier than a Pact Certain. A Pact Insidious allows a gullible mortal to believe he can gain the benefi ts of a fl irtation with evil without suffering its consequences. Thus, it exploits the eternal self-delusion of the lazy and greedy.
A contract of this type is written to deliver its promises in stages. To reap the next stage of benefits, the signatory must perform a new service for the devil. A fool who signs such a bargain rarely notices until it is too late that each service incrementally nudges him toward eternal damnation. Each task specified by a Pact Insidious is a corrupt act (see page 30). Hidden provisions in the contract revoke the previous benefi ts if the mortal stops performing the specified tasks.
Strict prohibitions forbid the mortal from disclosing the contents of the agreement to any third party. Though the contract does not explicitly say so, these prohibitions are meant to keep mortals away from meddlesome priests, who can perform atonement spells to absolve repentant signatories of the sins they have accumulated while fulfilling the terms of the contract."
He said his was a "One Stage" type, with one benefit for one act/price. (Saving my life for a favor, and he's giving me small benefits as he calls on each paper)

Huh, the supposed devils contract your character was forced to sign bears almost no resemblance to the FCII pact insidious. It looks to me like the other player pulled a fast one on you. But, ah well, I suppose that at this point in time it matters not.

[Unifel]

Huh, the supposed devils contract your character was forced to sign bears almost no resemblance to the FCII pact insidious. It looks to me like the other player pulled a fast on one you. But, ah well, I suppose that at this point in time it matters not.

Damn, that sucks... Guess I'll just have to do my best to make his life hell :smallcool:

[olentu]

Damn, that sucks... Guess I'll just have to do my best to make his life hell :smallcool:

With puns like that I doubt that you will have much difficulty.

[Sith_Happens]

Wait, I'm confused, are you saying you've already rerolled? Because even if all the contracts are valid, we gave you SO many loopholes it's not even funny.

[QuickLyRaiNbow]

Wait, you let this guy DM in your game? I would have been looking for the exits quite a while ago. It's pretty clear that everything involved with this pact is being made up and then given the least favorable interpretation.

[icefractal]

That pact ... doesn't actually compel you to do anything. At all. All that happens if you stop performing tasks is that you lose the "benefit" - which in this case is nothing. That's why usually these kind of pacts are for some kind of ongoing fiendish blessing.

[TuggyNE]

That pact ... doesn't actually compel you to do anything. At all. All that happens if you stop performing tasks is that you lose the "benefit" - which in this case is nothing. That's why usually these kind of pacts are for some kind of ongoing fiendish blessing.

Well, technically he would lose the benefit of having been saved from drowning. But I'm not sure the Tiefling can make much bank off of that. What's he going to do, drown him again?

[Andezzar]

What's he going to do, drown him again?He could try, but that is not part of the original agreement.