Character Alignment decisions - Evil or Good? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Character Alignment decisions - Evil or Good? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
gigantor22
03-24-08, 11:24 PM Hi,

Long time gamer, long time DM.

I have a player that has decided to play an unusual set of Prestige Classes in my new Eberron Age of Worms game. He has decided to play a Dread Necromancer/Dread Witch with a Celestial Bloodline. To his credit he is trying to create a dark character that is trying to do right with the abilites he is given.

What that adds up to is lots of Evil type things to do with the Prestige classes :devil: ...but with the Celestial bloodline :angelhide ability does not allow the use of evil "spells". Spells being the funny word. Do abilities not apply?

So here's the sticky wicket....He has just recently used his characters ability to Rebuke/Control the Undead. It is an Evil act and says so in the rules under Turning. There are also many Evil things the Dread Necro/Witch can do under their class abilities, such as disease, Negative energy etc.

How many such "evil" things need to take place before a character changes alignment? Five instances? Ten?

Can a player offset such things by say, casting a good aligned spell? Or giving money to the poor? Summoning a Unicorn perhaps?

I would imagine that after a certain amount of "Evil Acts" would change the character to Evil and the spell Atonement could be used to change the character back....it just seems cumbersome to have to adjudicate every spell and every ability as good and or evil, with many arguments in between.

Any suggestions would be appreciated. :D

-Gigantor22
Elsord0
03-25-08, 12:10 AM the alignment system is subjective. Changes in alignment are up to the DM I suppose. I was always under the impression that your alignment dictated the spells you could cast. So if you were a lawful Good wizard you could not summon a chaotic evil creature. And if you were a good cleric, you could not rebuke undead, you could only Turn them.

Couldn't he just be neutral or something
Dash Branaghan
03-25-08, 12:31 AM My response would be to consider how they are used.

For example, he controls undead and uses them to defeat the BBEG, then he's using what can be seen as an evil means to achieve a positive end. In this sense, he's a chaotic good character in my estimation.

Ultimately power is simply that - it's power. It's neutral. It's the use we put it to that defines where it falls in the Karmic Cosmos - use powers towards an evil end, then I would agree they are evil. Use them towards a good end, and they become anti-heroes like Batman, Morbius, Wolverine or Punisher.
Dunsel
03-25-08, 11:06 AM What that adds up to is lots of Evil type things to do with the Prestige classes :devil: ...but with the Celestial bloodline :angelhide ability does not allow the use of evil "spells". Spells being the funny word. Do abilities not apply?

-Gigantor22

Well, since the word "spells" is used and he is using a class ability, I would let it ride. Make sure he knows he is treading on very thin ice as most people are not going to look at his undead army and say, "It's alright, he got gold skin." They will think he is evil b/c he controls their sons and daughters!

Now, if he only controlled them long enough for them to be reburied, that is different. If he uses them for battle, even against evil, his alignment will be is question by the general pop. Non adventurers take a grim view of their relatives being used for cannon fodder.

You never mentioned the PC's alignment. Obviously, if the PC is of a good alignment, continued use of this "class ability" could be an issue.
Cartigan
03-25-08, 12:04 PM Where is the can't use evil rule on celestial bloodline? Also, if that is the rule, he can't play a Dread Necromancer as that is a decidedly evil class, even if he can balance it out and be neutral.
Nephlite
03-25-08, 12:27 PM the alignment system is subjective. Changes in alignment are up to the DM I suppose. I was always under the impression that your alignment dictated the spells you could cast. So if you were a lawful Good wizard you could not summon a chaotic evil creature. And if you were a good cleric, you could not rebuke undead, you could only Turn them.

Couldn't he just be neutral or something

Nope. Only Divine casters can't cast spells opposite of their alignment. Goode casters can. Infact, Completer Scoundrel has the Prc Malkover who is agood casters who can summon evil creatures (with no alignment issues from DM, his class feature says).

Neutral Clerics can do turning or rebuking. Also notice that neither negative energy or healing are aligned. But you still can only channel one spontanously; you have to prepare the other.

So here's the sticky wicket....He has just recently used his characters ability to Rebuke/Control the Undead. It is an Evil act and says so in the rules under Turning. There are also many Evil things the Dread Necro/Witch can do under their class abilities, such as disease, Negative energy etc.

1. Disease isn't innately evil. Rats aren't evil.
2. Negative energy is unaligned. Look up the PHB list of negative spells. Few are aligned.

The Dread Necro is non-good, but not required to be evil. He is evil curious. He is allowed to balanced good acts with evil to stay neutral (says so in the class alignment part).

What that adds up to is lots of Evil type things to do with the Prestige classes ...but with the Celestial bloodline ability does not allow the use of evil "spells". Spells being the funny word. Do abilities not apply?

If it says spells: abilities do not apply.

So all that means is he can't cast animate dead, summion undead spells, etc. He is free to cast any negative energy spell bcause they are rarely aligned.
tyrandor
03-25-08, 12:43 PM Even if the Cleric is neutral, channeling positive energy is good and channeling energy is evil

I think negative/positive energy spell don't have descriptor because it's obvious where they fall.

Which to me, as always been a bit silly anyway. If I use a negative energy spell to save the world - how's that an evil act? :rolleyes:

Many of the 'evil' spell don't make much sense in there descriptor either... I mean, there's a case to be made that once someone die, they aren't 'person' anymore, but merely bags of organic matter... so how's raising them and using them evil per say? It all depends on what your undead minion do really. If you use your zombies to get a kitten that's stuck in a tree back down to the ground safely... you suddenly shift from Neutral Good to Neutral Evil? ;)

How is using Enervate to drop someone's level to 0 and kill them more evil then using Lightning Bolt to fry them alive?

We started disposing of bodies for sanitary reason... society/religion gave it a bigger connotation. So raising the dead is definitely chaotic (it flies in the face of tradition and laws)... but evil? Meh.

But I'm getting off topic, never mind me.
LeeAlucard
03-25-08, 12:50 PM The Dread Necro is non-good, but not required to be evil. He is evil curious.

I had to admit, I chuckled when I saw that. I'm going to have to show that to my Dread Necro player.
Elsord0
03-25-08, 01:00 PM again, I think it is really subjective. You could consider animate dead evil, or you could consider it pragmatic, it is all about your point of view as the DM.

really its about the point of view you have created in your world. The way I see it, the rules are there as guidelines for the DM, do what works for your campaign.

peace
tyrandor
03-25-08, 01:09 PM So you make a Good character... but he just happens to have a knack for necromancy and other evil spell. He uses them for good.

He kills bad guys with negative energy spell and throws vicious curses their way. He cleans his Skeleton minions so they're all shinny white and smell good (no grave smell) and uses them as public servant in the hamlet he lives on - they fix roof, repair road, get kitten out of trees, etc... free labor that never gets tired or ask for a day off.

He's open, smiling and always ready to have tea and biscuit with his neighbor and aside from evil creature/people, he's never killed anything.

That'd be an interesting character concept I think, especially if you're in a game where your DM is a hardcore by the book nut.

You'd probably plummet to an Evil alignment, but still be a good jovial hearted fellow who's probably loved by the community.... who pops up when the paladin does Detect Evil. >_>
sblaxman
03-25-08, 03:08 PM I'd probably play it as a neutral character who WANTS to be good... he really does, but has some evil tendancies perhaps that keep him from truely being good. He wavers around the neutral area, sometimes close to good, sometimes closer to evil, depending on how well he is working on it. It's kinda hard when he's a pretty evil class by choice, unless he had some change of heart late in the game or something.

Or you can go tyrandors ways, where he uses typically evil things for good causes (sending an army of zombies to volenteer at Habitats for Humanity)

I never liked the 3e definition of evil, where you need to be some blood thirsty savage to be evil, I prefer it to be relative scale (where a burglar is evil even if he never attacks anyone, but not as evil as a lich). He can be a super nice guy, who loves kids, but liked to play in the graveyard a little too much on he days off. Enough so that he gets an evil tag, but isn't really a bad guy
gigantor22
03-25-08, 03:22 PM So you make a Good character... but he just happens to have a knack for necromancy and other evil spell. He uses them for good. He kills bad guys with negative energy spell and throws vicious curses their way. He cleans his Skeleton minions so they're all shinny white and smell good (no grave smell) and uses them as public servant in the hamlet he lives on - they fix roof, repair road, get kitten out of trees, etc... free labor that never gets tired or ask for a day off. >_>

That's all well fine and good but don't you think trapping a soul to a dead body or skeleton to be a good act? Especially if you use them to do something mundane such as sweep the walk or something more pragmatic such as attack "evil" monsters for the greater good.

Using them for any purpose is not a good act I'd say. Using them to put themselves out of their own misery on the other hand might be a good act however.

It's just a tricky situation that involves the DM to adjudicate all the time. So again, how many of these times would a character need to shift his alignment? Once? Five "evil" acts?

The person is of good alignment already so I imagine they'd shift to neutral then evil if the evil acts kept up.
LeeAlucard
03-25-08, 03:59 PM That's all well fine and good but don't you think trapping a soul to a dead body or skeleton to be a good act?

PLEASE, let's not get into this discussion. There are so many threads devoted to arguing this point, yet they're utterly incapable of convincing a person one way or another. In my opinion, there's absolutely no relation between trapped souls and zombies, but I'm never going to convince you of that.
gigantor22
03-25-08, 05:18 PM PLEASE, let's not get into this discussion. There are so many threads devoted to arguing this point, yet they're utterly incapable of convincing a person one way or another. In my opinion, there's absolutely no relation between trapped souls and zombies, but I'm never going to convince you of that.

Actually I'm not trying to be convinced of anything. As stated above, how many evil acts would it take to have someones alignment shift towards neutrality or evil?
LeeAlucard
03-25-08, 06:10 PM I was referring to trapping souls being part of animating skeletons and zombies. That seems to be almost as big an issue here sometimes as alignment discussions.

I'd say that an alignment change doesn't happen from a fixed number of incidents, but rather it occurs when you notice that these things happen a little too often for him/her to have this alignment.
Elsord0
03-25-08, 06:32 PM I think its easier for an alignment to change to evil than for an alignment to go to good. If one of my players commits an act that would be classified as anything other than what he is, I make him change his alignment. Its really kind of a strange game mechanic that has no set number. But my vote would be one act that is completely against a characters current alignment, changes thats alignment.
It would have to be something blatantly against it though.
Otherwise its just one more thing to keep track of, why bother analyzing every action to see if it correlates with their alignment? Seems like a waste of time.
tyrandor
03-25-08, 06:40 PM Giving a number seems a bit arbitrary.

There's degree of evil as well... stealing a beggar's money cup is evil, but not as much as deep frying a school bus of children and eating them with plum sauce.

Possibly the best way to figure it out is via roleplay and the character's view on things... once the character (not the player) does an evil action and doesn't view it as evil anymore... he's pretty much evil. Or at least, not good anymore.
Nephlite
03-25-08, 06:50 PM I think negative/positive energy spell don't have descriptor because it's obvious where they fall.

Nope. Because evil people cast healing spells. In fact, Core D&D Classes do so.
The Blackguard is the final nail in that coffin. He is evil and he cast healing spells.
So channelling positive energy is unaligned.

Thus, channeling negative must be likewise.

Only turning is alignment based.

How is using Enervate to drop someone's level to 0 and kill them more evil then using Lightning Bolt to fry them alive?

We started disposing of bodies for sanitary reason... society/religion gave it a bigger connotation. So raising the dead is definitely chaotic (it flies in the face of tradition and laws)... but evil? Meh.

But I'm getting off topic, never mind me.

Working off a bad interpretation does cause problems.

Now while animating undead is evil discriptor: I still think one can use it for good deeds. Like animating evil creatures and making them save people. The world is a better place for it.
tyrandor
03-25-08, 07:46 PM Hmm, I'm not quite sure what you're contesting me on here.

So a Blackguard can cast a healing spell... well he doesn't become good because of it.

Much like my happy-fun-time Necromancer above isn't evil because he uses undead.

We seem to agree on that.

Thus, channeling negative must be likewise.

Only turning is alignment based.

Working off a bad interpretation does cause problems.

Seem to be the main issue.

Now I'm not saying I'm not going off a bad interpretation. I can be wrong. alignment in my games are extremely broad guideline and I certainly don't use them like hammer to keep my player in line (And I'm also one of those weirdo who believe intention is more important then action when it comes to this)...

BUT, the following is from the core book, not from me

Even if the Cleric is neutral, channeling positive energy is good and channeling energy is evil

Which imply that yes, positive and negative energy have the 'hidden' good and evil tag. Granted, this little blurb of text is under the turning/rebuking part... but why use 'channeling positive energy' and 'channeling negative energy' instead of turning and rebuking if they meant for those activites only.

The Blackguard who use a healing spell is channeling positive energy and that is a good act... but since he's probably using it to heal evil creature/himself, he's using a good action to further evil. Net result is an evil action.

But spell is still a good spell.

This is the exact opposite of someone using an evil spell (animate dead) to do good... ultimately, he's not evil.

I don't really like the idea that they are 'good' and 'evil' spell. Spells aren't sentient, the magic user being them is what makes it good or evil IMO. But the game system doesn't see it that way.
sblaxman
03-25-08, 11:17 PM I don't really like the idea that they are 'good' and 'evil' spell. Spells aren't sentient, the magic user being them is what makes it good or evil IMO. But the game system doesn't see it that way.
Reply With Quote

While I mostly agree w/ you (that a good to do evil balance out (I'd say to neutral, but that's a different arguement)). I think the desciptor of good/evil for spells is for classification reasons. The world as defined by the creators (gods/DMs/WotC) decided that certain spell effects are inately evil, while others are inately good. The spell isn't sentient, the effect of the spell has an effect and the descriptor shows that. Thus a race/character who cannot use 'evil' spells can't use a spell that is defined as evil.
Half_Dragon_Infernal
03-25-08, 11:27 PM I say that only spells that specifically affect certain alignments are classified with alignment tags for the most part. Summoning evil creatures though, unless they are just barely evil, is an evil act. Same with any alignment.
tyrandor
03-26-08, 12:36 PM I understand that aligned spells/items/towels are a game mechanism and that's just fine. I don't let paladin use evil aligned weapons in my game, even if it's for a good cause.

That doesn't mean I'm not philosophically puzzled by the idea of an evil object. I guess my D4 are really evil, they hurt like mofo when I step on them...

I say that only spells that specifically affect certain alignments are classified with alignment tags for the most part. Summoning evil creatures though, unless they are just barely evil, is an evil act. Same with any alignment.

And to further confuse the issue, it seems a lot of splatbook have different view.

Look at malconvoker...

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
gigantor22 03-24-08, 11:24 PM	Hi, Long time gamer, long time DM. I have a player that has decided to play an unusual set of Prestige Classes in my new Eberron Age of Worms game. He has decided to play a Dread Necromancer/Dread Witch with a Celestial Bloodline. To his credit he is trying to create a dark character that is trying to do right with the abilites he is given. What that adds up to is lots of Evil type things to do with the Prestige classes :devil: ...but with the Celestial bloodline :angelhide ability does not allow the use of evil "spells". Spells being the funny word. Do abilities not apply? So here's the sticky wicket....He has just recently used his characters ability to Rebuke/Control the Undead. It is an Evil act and says so in the rules under Turning. There are also many Evil things the Dread Necro/Witch can do under their class abilities, such as disease, Negative energy etc. How many such "evil" things need to take place before a character changes alignment? Five instances? Ten? Can a player offset such things by say, casting a good aligned spell? Or giving money to the poor? Summoning a Unicorn perhaps? I would imagine that after a certain amount of "Evil Acts" would change the character to Evil and the spell Atonement could be used to change the character back....it just seems cumbersome to have to adjudicate every spell and every ability as good and or evil, with many arguments in between. Any suggestions would be appreciated. :D -Gigantor22
Elsord0 03-25-08, 12:10 AM	the alignment system is subjective. Changes in alignment are up to the DM I suppose. I was always under the impression that your alignment dictated the spells you could cast. So if you were a lawful Good wizard you could not summon a chaotic evil creature. And if you were a good cleric, you could not rebuke undead, you could only Turn them. Couldn't he just be neutral or something
Dash Branaghan 03-25-08, 12:31 AM	My response would be to consider how they are used. For example, he controls undead and uses them to defeat the BBEG, then he's using what can be seen as an evil means to achieve a positive end. In this sense, he's a chaotic good character in my estimation. Ultimately power is simply that - it's power. It's neutral. It's the use we put it to that defines where it falls in the Karmic Cosmos - use powers towards an evil end, then I would agree they are evil. Use them towards a good end, and they become anti-heroes like Batman, Morbius, Wolverine or Punisher.
Dunsel 03-25-08, 11:06 AM	What that adds up to is lots of Evil type things to do with the Prestige classes :devil: ...but with the Celestial bloodline :angelhide ability does not allow the use of evil "spells". Spells being the funny word. Do abilities not apply? -Gigantor22 Well, since the word "spells" is used and he is using a class ability, I would let it ride. Make sure he knows he is treading on very thin ice as most people are not going to look at his undead army and say, "It's alright, he got gold skin." They will think he is evil b/c he controls their sons and daughters! Now, if he only controlled them long enough for them to be reburied, that is different. If he uses them for battle, even against evil, his alignment will be is question by the general pop. Non adventurers take a grim view of their relatives being used for cannon fodder. You never mentioned the PC's alignment. Obviously, if the PC is of a good alignment, continued use of this "class ability" could be an issue.
Cartigan 03-25-08, 12:04 PM	Where is the can't use evil rule on celestial bloodline? Also, if that is the rule, he can't play a Dread Necromancer as that is a decidedly evil class, even if he can balance it out and be neutral.
Nephlite 03-25-08, 12:27 PM	the alignment system is subjective. Changes in alignment are up to the DM I suppose. I was always under the impression that your alignment dictated the spells you could cast. So if you were a lawful Good wizard you could not summon a chaotic evil creature. And if you were a good cleric, you could not rebuke undead, you could only Turn them. Couldn't he just be neutral or something Nope. Only Divine casters can't cast spells opposite of their alignment. Goode casters can. Infact, Completer Scoundrel has the Prc Malkover who is agood casters who can summon evil creatures (with no alignment issues from DM, his class feature says). Neutral Clerics can do turning or rebuking. Also notice that neither negative energy or healing are aligned. But you still can only channel one spontanously; you have to prepare the other. So here's the sticky wicket....He has just recently used his characters ability to Rebuke/Control the Undead. It is an Evil act and says so in the rules under Turning. There are also many Evil things the Dread Necro/Witch can do under their class abilities, such as disease, Negative energy etc. 1. Disease isn't innately evil. Rats aren't evil. 2. Negative energy is unaligned. Look up the PHB list of negative spells. Few are aligned. The Dread Necro is non-good, but not required to be evil. He is evil curious. He is allowed to balanced good acts with evil to stay neutral (says so in the class alignment part). What that adds up to is lots of Evil type things to do with the Prestige classes ...but with the Celestial bloodline ability does not allow the use of evil "spells". Spells being the funny word. Do abilities not apply? If it says spells: abilities do not apply. So all that means is he can't cast animate dead, summion undead spells, etc. He is free to cast any negative energy spell bcause they are rarely aligned.
tyrandor 03-25-08, 12:43 PM	Even if the Cleric is neutral, channeling positive energy is good and channeling energy is evil I think negative/positive energy spell don't have descriptor because it's obvious where they fall. Which to me, as always been a bit silly anyway. If I use a negative energy spell to save the world - how's that an evil act? :rolleyes: Many of the 'evil' spell don't make much sense in there descriptor either... I mean, there's a case to be made that once someone die, they aren't 'person' anymore, but merely bags of organic matter... so how's raising them and using them evil per say? It all depends on what your undead minion do really. If you use your zombies to get a kitten that's stuck in a tree back down to the ground safely... you suddenly shift from Neutral Good to Neutral Evil? ;) How is using Enervate to drop someone's level to 0 and kill them more evil then using Lightning Bolt to fry them alive? We started disposing of bodies for sanitary reason... society/religion gave it a bigger connotation. So raising the dead is definitely chaotic (it flies in the face of tradition and laws)... but evil? Meh. But I'm getting off topic, never mind me.
LeeAlucard 03-25-08, 12:50 PM	The Dread Necro is non-good, but not required to be evil. He is evil curious. I had to admit, I chuckled when I saw that. I'm going to have to show that to my Dread Necro player.
Elsord0 03-25-08, 01:00 PM	again, I think it is really subjective. You could consider animate dead evil, or you could consider it pragmatic, it is all about your point of view as the DM. really its about the point of view you have created in your world. The way I see it, the rules are there as guidelines for the DM, do what works for your campaign. peace
tyrandor 03-25-08, 01:09 PM	So you make a Good character... but he just happens to have a knack for necromancy and other evil spell. He uses them for good. He kills bad guys with negative energy spell and throws vicious curses their way. He cleans his Skeleton minions so they're all shinny white and smell good (no grave smell) and uses them as public servant in the hamlet he lives on - they fix roof, repair road, get kitten out of trees, etc... free labor that never gets tired or ask for a day off. He's open, smiling and always ready to have tea and biscuit with his neighbor and aside from evil creature/people, he's never killed anything. That'd be an interesting character concept I think, especially if you're in a game where your DM is a hardcore by the book nut. You'd probably plummet to an Evil alignment, but still be a good jovial hearted fellow who's probably loved by the community.... who pops up when the paladin does Detect Evil. >_>
sblaxman 03-25-08, 03:08 PM	I'd probably play it as a neutral character who WANTS to be good... he really does, but has some evil tendancies perhaps that keep him from truely being good. He wavers around the neutral area, sometimes close to good, sometimes closer to evil, depending on how well he is working on it. It's kinda hard when he's a pretty evil class by choice, unless he had some change of heart late in the game or something. Or you can go tyrandors ways, where he uses typically evil things for good causes (sending an army of zombies to volenteer at Habitats for Humanity) I never liked the 3e definition of evil, where you need to be some blood thirsty savage to be evil, I prefer it to be relative scale (where a burglar is evil even if he never attacks anyone, but not as evil as a lich). He can be a super nice guy, who loves kids, but liked to play in the graveyard a little too much on he days off. Enough so that he gets an evil tag, but isn't really a bad guy
gigantor22 03-25-08, 03:22 PM	So you make a Good character... but he just happens to have a knack for necromancy and other evil spell. He uses them for good. He kills bad guys with negative energy spell and throws vicious curses their way. He cleans his Skeleton minions so they're all shinny white and smell good (no grave smell) and uses them as public servant in the hamlet he lives on - they fix roof, repair road, get kitten out of trees, etc... free labor that never gets tired or ask for a day off. >_> That's all well fine and good but don't you think trapping a soul to a dead body or skeleton to be a good act? Especially if you use them to do something mundane such as sweep the walk or something more pragmatic such as attack "evil" monsters for the greater good. Using them for any purpose is not a good act I'd say. Using them to put themselves out of their own misery on the other hand might be a good act however. It's just a tricky situation that involves the DM to adjudicate all the time. So again, how many of these times would a character need to shift his alignment? Once? Five "evil" acts? The person is of good alignment already so I imagine they'd shift to neutral then evil if the evil acts kept up.
LeeAlucard 03-25-08, 03:59 PM	That's all well fine and good but don't you think trapping a soul to a dead body or skeleton to be a good act? PLEASE, let's not get into this discussion. There are so many threads devoted to arguing this point, yet they're utterly incapable of convincing a person one way or another. In my opinion, there's absolutely no relation between trapped souls and zombies, but I'm never going to convince you of that.
gigantor22 03-25-08, 05:18 PM	PLEASE, let's not get into this discussion. There are so many threads devoted to arguing this point, yet they're utterly incapable of convincing a person one way or another. In my opinion, there's absolutely no relation between trapped souls and zombies, but I'm never going to convince you of that. Actually I'm not trying to be convinced of anything. As stated above, how many evil acts would it take to have someones alignment shift towards neutrality or evil?
LeeAlucard 03-25-08, 06:10 PM	I was referring to trapping souls being part of animating skeletons and zombies. That seems to be almost as big an issue here sometimes as alignment discussions. I'd say that an alignment change doesn't happen from a fixed number of incidents, but rather it occurs when you notice that these things happen a little too often for him/her to have this alignment.
Elsord0 03-25-08, 06:32 PM	I think its easier for an alignment to change to evil than for an alignment to go to good. If one of my players commits an act that would be classified as anything other than what he is, I make him change his alignment. Its really kind of a strange game mechanic that has no set number. But my vote would be one act that is completely against a characters current alignment, changes thats alignment. It would have to be something blatantly against it though. Otherwise its just one more thing to keep track of, why bother analyzing every action to see if it correlates with their alignment? Seems like a waste of time.
tyrandor 03-25-08, 06:40 PM	Giving a number seems a bit arbitrary. There's degree of evil as well... stealing a beggar's money cup is evil, but not as much as deep frying a school bus of children and eating them with plum sauce. Possibly the best way to figure it out is via roleplay and the character's view on things... once the character (not the player) does an evil action and doesn't view it as evil anymore... he's pretty much evil. Or at least, not good anymore.
Nephlite 03-25-08, 06:50 PM	I think negative/positive energy spell don't have descriptor because it's obvious where they fall. Nope. Because evil people cast healing spells. In fact, Core D&D Classes do so. The Blackguard is the final nail in that coffin. He is evil and he cast healing spells. So channelling positive energy is unaligned. Thus, channeling negative must be likewise. Only turning is alignment based. How is using Enervate to drop someone's level to 0 and kill them more evil then using Lightning Bolt to fry them alive? We started disposing of bodies for sanitary reason... society/religion gave it a bigger connotation. So raising the dead is definitely chaotic (it flies in the face of tradition and laws)... but evil? Meh. But I'm getting off topic, never mind me. Working off a bad interpretation does cause problems. Now while animating undead is evil discriptor: I still think one can use it for good deeds. Like animating evil creatures and making them save people. The world is a better place for it.
tyrandor 03-25-08, 07:46 PM	Hmm, I'm not quite sure what you're contesting me on here. So a Blackguard can cast a healing spell... well he doesn't become good because of it. Much like my happy-fun-time Necromancer above isn't evil because he uses undead. We seem to agree on that. Thus, channeling negative must be likewise. Only turning is alignment based. Working off a bad interpretation does cause problems. Seem to be the main issue. Now I'm not saying I'm not going off a bad interpretation. I can be wrong. alignment in my games are extremely broad guideline and I certainly don't use them like hammer to keep my player in line (And I'm also one of those weirdo who believe intention is more important then action when it comes to this)... BUT, the following is from the core book, not from me Even if the Cleric is neutral, channeling positive energy is good and channeling energy is evil Which imply that yes, positive and negative energy have the 'hidden' good and evil tag. Granted, this little blurb of text is under the turning/rebuking part... but why use 'channeling positive energy' and 'channeling negative energy' instead of turning and rebuking if they meant for those activites only. The Blackguard who use a healing spell is channeling positive energy and that is a good act... but since he's probably using it to heal evil creature/himself, he's using a good action to further evil. Net result is an evil action. But spell is still a good spell. This is the exact opposite of someone using an evil spell (animate dead) to do good... ultimately, he's not evil. I don't really like the idea that they are 'good' and 'evil' spell. Spells aren't sentient, the magic user being them is what makes it good or evil IMO. But the game system doesn't see it that way.
sblaxman 03-25-08, 11:17 PM	I don't really like the idea that they are 'good' and 'evil' spell. Spells aren't sentient, the magic user being them is what makes it good or evil IMO. But the game system doesn't see it that way. Reply With Quote While I mostly agree w/ you (that a good to do evil balance out (I'd say to neutral, but that's a different arguement)). I think the desciptor of good/evil for spells is for classification reasons. The world as defined by the creators (gods/DMs/WotC) decided that certain spell effects are inately evil, while others are inately good. The spell isn't sentient, the effect of the spell has an effect and the descriptor shows that. Thus a race/character who cannot use 'evil' spells can't use a spell that is defined as evil.
Half_Dragon_Infernal 03-25-08, 11:27 PM	I say that only spells that specifically affect certain alignments are classified with alignment tags for the most part. Summoning evil creatures though, unless they are just barely evil, is an evil act. Same with any alignment.
tyrandor 03-26-08, 12:36 PM	I understand that aligned spells/items/towels are a game mechanism and that's just fine. I don't let paladin use evil aligned weapons in my game, even if it's for a good cause. That doesn't mean I'm not philosophically puzzled by the idea of an evil object. I guess my D4 are really evil, they hurt like mofo when I step on them... I say that only spells that specifically affect certain alignments are classified with alignment tags for the most part. Summoning evil creatures though, unless they are just barely evil, is an evil act. Same with any alignment. And to further confuse the issue, it seems a lot of splatbook have different view. Look at malconvoker...