Applications of having two alignments?

[Xuldarinar]

Given the vigilante class is now on the PFSRD, I have been given the chance to look over it. While many of its facets interest me, there is one I want to make note of and discuss. This takes the form of a class feature.


A vigilante hides his true identity, allowing him to move about social circles and nobility without carrying the stigma of his ruthless actions. In effect, the vigilante has two identities: one is a polite member of society while the other is a skilled and cunning warrior. To keep up this charade, the vigilante usually has two names: his true name, used in polite company, and his vigilante name, used to strike fear in the hearts of those who oppose him. Knowledge checks about one do not reveal information about the other, unless the vigilante's true identity revealed to the world at large.

The vigilante can start each day in either of his identities, referred to simply as social or vigilante. Changing from one identity to another takes 1 minute and must be done out of sight from other creatures to preserve the vigilante's secret.

Changing identities is more than just changing outfits and clothing (although that is certainly a part of it); the process often also involves applying make-up, altering his hair, and adjusting other personal effects. Furthermore, the change is as much a state of mind as of body, so items such as a hat of disguise and similar spells and effects that change the user's appearance do not reduce the time required to change identities. Most social talents require the vigilante to be in his social identity, but a vigilante who uses vigilante talents in his social identity risks exposing his secret.

Despite being a single person, a vigilante's dual nature allows him to have two alignments, one for each of his identities. When in an identity, he is treated as having that identity's alignment for all spells, magic items, and abilities that rely on alignment. For the purpose of meeting a qualification for a feat, class, or any ability, he is only eligible if both of his alignments meet the requirements.

A vigilante's two alignments cannot be more than one step from each other on a single alignment axis. For example, a vigilante with a lawful neutral social identity could have a vigilante identity that is lawful good, lawful neutral, lawful evil, neutral, neutral good, or neutral evil. If a vigilante is the target of an effect that would change his alignment, it changes both of his alignments to the new alignment.

Any attempts to scry or otherwise locate the vigilante work only if the vigilante is currently in the identity the creature is attempting to locate (or if the creature knows that the two identities are the same individual). Otherwise, the spell or effect has no effect, revealing nothing but darkness, as if the target were invalid or did not exist.


So, with that out of the way I must ask; In what ways can we make use of having two alignments by merit of having this class feature?

[Florian]

Depending on how strict alignments are handled, I´d guess.

You could do things in one identity that would normally cause an alignment shift and thereby prevent this.
Example: A True Neutral businessman by day and a psychotic Neutral Evil slasher by night. The nightly activity would not cause any shift to the businessman identity.

[Xuldarinar]

Well, here is one thing to ask;


Im a vigilante. I have no specific patron deity. My social alignment is Chaotic Neutral. My vigilante alignment is Neutral Evil. Where do I go when I die?

Application: One could use one identity to conceivably avoid being sentenced to the lower planes.

[hamishspence]

Well, here is one thing to ask;


Im a vigilante. I have no specific patron deity. My social alignment is Chaotic Neutral. My vigilante alignment is Neutral Evil. Where do I go when I die?

Maximum of one step - Neutral social, NE vigilante, or CN social, CE vigilante, work, though.

I'd treat the "lowest" as the base for afterlife purposes.

[Xuldarinar]

Maximum of one step - Neutral social, NE vigilante, or CN social, CE vigilante, work, though.

I'd treat the "lowest" as the base for afterlife purposes.

Maximum one step on a given axis.
"For example, a vigilante with a lawful neutral social identity could have a vigilante identity that is lawful good, lawful neutral, lawful evil, neutral, neutral good, or neutral evil. If a vigilante is the target of an effect that would change his alignment, it changes both of his alignments to the new alignment."


That aside, I suppose that makes sense on the Good-Evil axis. Still, there is the question of what to do in relation to Law vs Chaos.

[hamishspence]

Maximum one step on a given axis.

Fair enough - LG can't have TN identity, because that's one step on two axes.

[Slithery D]

Fair enough - LG can't have TN identity, because that's one step on two axes.

??? But it's only one step per individual axis, so it's allowed. LG to NG is one step on the ethics axis. LG to LN is one step on the moral axis. Both individual steps on separate axes get you from LG to N.

You can see it in the quoted example: a vigilante can have both LN and NG (or NE) alignments, the same distance as TN and LG. Basically you can't have any opposing alignments (chaotic/lawful, evil/good), but anything else is fair game.

[hamishspence]

I thought "one step on a single axis" meant only one axis at a time.

But I suppose the example does refute that.

[Xuldarinar]

Fun case of interpretation. For instance;

Given a Vigilante can hold two alignments, they could conceivably be LG and any alignment within two steps (Excluding two steps in the same direction), or CE and any within two steps.

So, hinging on interpretation of a particular passage, a Vigilante could multiclass in Paladin (or antipaladin) and Druid.

Additionally, given multiclassing and a recently added archetype of the bard (Masked Performer).. You could be TN socially, with your Masked and Vigilante alignments being diametrically opposed.

[Psyren]

So, hinging on interpretation of a particular passage, a Vigilante could multiclass in Paladin (or antipaladin) and Druid.

The problem with this strategy is that you don't stop being the other class when you change identities. They are "always on." So while you certainly can multiclass into them while your alignments match their requirements, the minute you switch away from LG/XN, your paladin or druid side falls and needs atonement, even if you switch back.

[Florian]

The problem with this strategy is that you don't stop being the other class when you change identities. They are "always on." So while you certainly can multiclass into them while your alignments match their requirements, the minute you switch away from LG/XN, your paladin or druid side falls and needs atonement, even if you switch back.

That´s the question here, ain´t it? A Vigilante does not experience an alignment shift and the way the identities are stated, it doesn´t lose the alignment it is not currently using, but that is still an active part of the other identity.

I rather guess that it is like any instance of losing the prerequisite for something and that something ceasing to work properly until the prerequisites are fully met again.

Edit: I think it is too weird to consider being of any use. Permanently switching class features on and off will play havoc with companion creatures and by the nature of this situation, companions should not be able to stack. So for Vigilante 2/Paladin4/Druid1, that would rather mean choosing the weapon bond and domain instead of the companion.

[Gallowglass]

Despite being a single person, a vigilante's dual nature allows him to have two alignments, one for each of his identities. When in an identity, he is treated as having that identity's alignment for all spells, magic items, and abilities that rely on alignment. For the purpose of meeting a qualification for a feat, class, or any ability, he is only eligible if both of his alignments meet the requirements.

this prevents that kind of exploit. You can't be a paladin if one identity is lawful good, but the other is lawful neutral. Most exploits you are going to think of with this are wiped out by that line.

[Psyren]

this prevents that kind of exploit. You can't be a paladin if one identity is lawful good, but the other is lawful neutral. Most exploits you are going to think of with this are wiped out by that line.

Good catch, that settles that :smallsmile:

[Serafina]

Fun fact:
The Magical Child archetype explicitly overrules that part for the purpose of familiars, stating

but only the magical child's vigilante identity needs to have an alignment that fulfills the alignment prerequisites of the improved familiar.

So you get
Social Identity: Normal Alignment
Vigilante Identity: Alignment one step away on one axis.
Familiar: Alignment up to one more step away on each axis.

Which can actually allow you to be Neutral Good, True Neutral as a Vigilante and get a Lawful Evil Improved Familiar.
Or be Chaotic Evil, Chaotic Neutral as a Vigilante and get a Neutral Good Improved Familiar.

[Florian]

Which can actually allow you to be Neutral Good, True Neutral as a Vigilante and get a Lawful Evil Improved Familiar.
Or be Chaotic Evil, Chaotic Neutral as a Vigilante and get a Neutral Good Improved Familiar.

Totally crazy when you think of it. Either the Magical Child is totally exempt from any sort of alignment shift, or the whole concept breaks down later on due to using too many alignment-specific elements.

[Serafina]

Eh, not really.

Being mostly good, but having an Evil familiar?
Made a pact with a devil to do good deeds, took an alignment hit for that, but is not actually doing any evil deeds and is trying to redeem the devil.
Mostly evil, but has a good familiar?
Familiar is trying to redeem them, but is only somewhat succeeding to bring out the "good side" which is then actually neutral.

You can get interesting roleplaying ideas out of that. And associating with an evil being doesn't hit your alignment after all (unless you're particularly stuffy paladin).

[Xuldarinar]

Fun fact:
The Magical Child archetype explicitly overrules that part for the purpose of familiars, stating


So you get
Social Identity: Normal Alignment
Vigilante Identity: Alignment one step away on one axis.
Familiar: Alignment up to one more step away on each axis.

Which can actually allow you to be Neutral Good, True Neutral as a Vigilante and get a Lawful Evil Improved Familiar.
Or be Chaotic Evil, Chaotic Neutral as a Vigilante and get a Neutral Good Improved Familiar.

So.. let me get this straight.

Im Lawful Good My Vigilante Identity is true neutral (which is allowed given the example). My familiar can be a quasit.

[Gallowglass]

Fun fact:
The Magical Child archetype explicitly overrules that part for the purpose of familiars, stating


So you get
Social Identity: Normal Alignment
Vigilante Identity: Alignment one step away on one axis.
Familiar: Alignment up to one more step away on each axis.

Which can actually allow you to be Neutral Good, True Neutral as a Vigilante and get a Lawful Evil Improved Familiar.
Or be Chaotic Evil, Chaotic Neutral as a Vigilante and get a Neutral Good Improved Familiar.

"No Serefina! I came to you so that you could SAVE the academy, not burn it to the ground!"

"Shut up, Cherubi you fat little baby."

"Oh god, I can hear the children's screams!"

"Yeah... like angels singing."

[Serafina]

So.. let me get this straight.

Im Lawful Good My Vigilante Identity is true neutral (which is allowed given the example). My familiar can be a quasit.Not quite.
If your social identity is LG, your Vigilante identity can be either NG or LN - one step on one axis. LG to TN is one step, but on two axis.
If you're a NG Vigilante, you can have a LG, NG, CG, LN, TN or CN familiar.
If you're a LN Vigilante, you can have a LG, NG, LN, TN, LE or NE familiar.

What you could do when you have a Quasit (CE) as a familiar is to be CE, NE, CN or TN in your vigilante identity. This would then allow you to be LE, NE, CE, LN, TN, CN, NG or CG in your social identity.
So a neutral good person with a chaotic evil familiar? Yep, that's possible this way. Lawful Good goes too far though.

[Xuldarinar]

Not quite.
If your social identity is LG, your Vigilante identity can be either NG or LN - one step on one axis. LG to TN is one step, but on two axis.
If you're a NG Vigilante, you can have a LG, NG, CG, LN, TN or CN familiar.
If you're a LN Vigilante, you can have a LG, NG, LN, TN, LE or NE familiar.

What you could do when you have a Quasit (CE) as a familiar is to be CE, NE, CN or TN in your vigilante identity. This would then allow you to be LE, NE, CE, LN, TN, CN, NG or CG in your social identity.
So a neutral good person with a chaotic evil familiar? Yep, that's possible this way. Lawful Good goes too far though.

I gather what you are saying, but to quote the text;


"For example, a vigilante with a lawful neutral social identity could have a vigilante identity that is lawful good, lawful neutral, lawful evil, neutral, neutral good, or neutral evil. If a vigilante is the target of an effect that would change his alignment, it changes both of his alignments to the new alignment."

According to their example, its a bit more than their wording initially seems to state.

[Psyren]

Not quite.
If your social identity is LG, your Vigilante identity can be either NG or LN - one step on one axis. LG to TN is one step, but on two axis.

See, that's what I thought too, but it seems that for a vigilante, diagonal is considered one step away. The example Vigilante in the book can be LN+NG or LN+NE, which is normally two steps rather than one.

The example Vigilante (LN) would have the following social identity choices:



CG
NG
LG


CN
TN
LN


CE
NE
LE



Whereas a cleric of a LN deity with the normal one-step rule would be:



CG
NG
LG


CN
TN
LN


CE
NE
LE





Yeah it's weird.

[Xuldarinar]

See, that's what I thought too, but it seems that for a vigilante, diagonal is considered one step away. The example Vigilante in the book can be LN+NG or LN+NE, which is normally two steps rather than one.

The example Vigilante (LN) would have the following social identity choices:



CG
NG
LG


CN
TN
LN


CE
NE
LE



Whereas a cleric of a LN deity with the normal one-step rule would be:



CG
NG
LG


CN
TN
LN


CE
NE
LE





Yeah it's weird.

This actually gets to be interesting when you considering the Zealot archetype.

If I worship a LN deity, I can be LG, LN, TN, or LE.

But that is only for my Vigilante Identity. My social identity could then be... literally any other alignment pending upon which alignment my vigilante identity is.


Conversely, if I were to worship Asmodeus (a LE deity), my Vigilante identity could be; LN, LE, or NE. My social Identity could then be, pending upon the decision of my vigilante alignment, anything but Chaotic Good.

[Florian]

Eh, not really.

Being mostly good, but having an Evil familiar?
Made a pact with a devil to do good deeds, took an alignment hit for that, but is not actually doing any evil deeds and is trying to redeem the devil.
Mostly evil, but has a good familiar?
Familiar is trying to redeem them, but is only somewhat succeeding to bring out the "good side" which is then actually neutral.

You can get interesting roleplaying ideas out of that. And associating with an evil being doesn't hit your alignment after all (unless you're particularly stuffy paladin).

What I meant is that on the three-alignment character, you must be watchful that no shift happens that move the neutral alignment component around too much, else you can rebuild the whole character.

[Serafina]

That's true for any Alignment-based character though. Being Evil or Good doesn't necessitate doing things that are extreme enough for an alignment-shift.
And it's not like the character can actually fall if the alignment shifts. If it does? You need to rework your familiar a bit. That sucks if you relied on that specific form for combat, but there are plenty of good non-restricted combat forms for a familiar.

[Florian]

That's true for any Alignment-based character though. Being Evil or Good doesn't necessitate doing things that are extreme enough for an alignment-shift.
And it's not like the character can actually fall if the alignment shifts. If it does? You need to rework your familiar a bit. That sucks if you relied on that specific form for combat, but there are plenty of good non-restricted combat forms for a familiar.

I actually think it´s a bit harder for the Vigilante than, say, for a Paladin. The Paladin is fixed on one alignment, making it easy to chose your actions in a way that will be in keeping with that alignment.
In case of the Vigilante, a shift in one alignment can force the other alignment to shift along with it. That is extremely noticeable with one of them being TN.

Playing a regular module or AP where you´re regularly playing the good guys and do heroic deeds, it will be rather tough to keep your, let´s say TN social identity, from engaging in the action in a way that would not make you experience a shift.