| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| branmakmuffin |
Posted - 25 Apr 2003 : 23:52:46
The 3e PHB says that when a monk becomes 20th level, s/he is considered a Lawful Outsider and is subject to things like Protect from Law, etc. What about the other portion of the monk's alignment? Should a 20th level LG monk also be subject to Prot. from Good, etc.? Infernal/celestial critters are subject to the spells that affect both portions of their alignment, aren't they? |
| 12 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| branmakmuffin |
Posted - 05 Jun 2003 : 22:39:13
Artalis:
quote:
Ok you win, I surrender to the clamour of voices stating my error.
I had forgotten that an ordinary good person is hedged out by a protection from good spell. So in that case, yes the arguement is pointless and I concede the point. (But if it's pointless is there a point to concede? hmmm...)
What point are you conceding? It looks to me like the consensus of the thread is that the other part of the alignment doesn't matter for the monk's outsiderish-ness. Wasn't that your assertion?
Why, man, I'd say you won the argument. |
| Artalis |
Posted - 03 Jun 2003 : 18:35:36
Ok you win, I surrender to the clamour of voices stating my error.
I had forgotten that an ordinary good person is hedged out by a protection from good spell. So in that case, yes the arguement is pointless and I concede the point. (But if it's pointless is there a point to concede? hmmm...)
|
| Cult_Leader |
Posted - 27 May 2003 : 22:57:05
Well lets look at it this way then, and see if we can not come up with a good standing point upon this subject. THink about it this way, Yes the Monk is now subject to protection from Lawful. Just as the Monk is subject to being banished back to his home plain. So! THEREFORE, if a monk can be sent back to his home plain just because he is now and out sider, and he is also not effected by other spells.... then I can see why it should, and how it could, effect the other part of his align. |
| The Sage |
Posted - 26 May 2003 : 09:13:04
I believe that I would also interprete this arguement in the same perspective as well Unixx.
Branmakmuffin, the PC monk, as an outsider, should not have a bearing on his ability to cast and use successfully a Protection from Good spell.
Good learning...
- The Sage of Perth: For all your Realms Lore needs
|
| unixx |
Posted - 26 May 2003 : 09:06:28
ok. just for a second lets forget about the monk being lawful ok? now regardless he is still good or at least for this example. now lets picture this a cleric casts a pro. evil spell this hedges out all evil from that plane or otherwise, correct? so, if it does this it shouldn't matter weather or not the monk is an outsider simply by him being good (weather he be more or less good if his align. states it he is) he would fall under the conditons of a pro. good spell. so therefore my personal opinon is that him being an outsider has no weight to this arguement and the spell would work regardless.
And another thing. the P.H.B. states that as an outsider a 20-th level monk is subject to spells that repel enchanted creatures SUCH AS pro. law their not saying that pro. good won't work on them their just clarifying that it will. they just used pro. law because all monk have to be lawful therefore they no that no matter weather your monk be LG, LN, LE there is still a common align. among them to show an example. |
| Artalis |
Posted - 20 May 2003 : 22:30:28
I believe the key is in the what bran said the 3e phb says he becomes a "Lawful Outsider" ie the ethos is what matters in this case. I don't thing the monk would be "ignoring" part of it's alignment just that the focus is on the ethics rather than his morals.
But whatever... |
| Edain Shadowstar |
Posted - 26 Apr 2003 : 23:10:38
I would have to agree with Bookwyrm and Mournblade. The note, as Bookwyrm cited, states "such as", which is typically inpreted as having other connotations. And I think Mournblade makes a good point with the demon example.
Now, while I do agree with Bookwyrm and Mournblade, can't Monks when they beomce outsiders still be resurrected as normal? If they can, and I thought there was loop hole for that, then Artalis' arguement gains some more credability, since they would be special outsiders, with special rules. In the end, it's a point of interpretations, and I personally would say that Protection from Good/Evil can work on them, and other alignment spells.
Just my 2,ooo pp. |
| Mournblade |
Posted - 26 Apr 2003 : 17:57:19
If you summon a Demon, you can keeo it out with both Protection from CHAOS, and Protection from EVIL. Same goes for a devil only Prot. From Law applies.
You cannot say that monks are more lawful and paladins are more good. This is an individual Character thing. One lawful monk may be MORE or Less good than another lawful good monk.
But if you are an outsider, I do not see how it is possible that ONE part of the alignment applies over another.
Consider using the Prtoection from Evil on a Monk of the LONG DEATH. Suddenly it does not work... WHY? This is a Lawful Evil Outsider, and protection from Evil did not work. THis Lawful evil outsider penetrates the protection from evil? I just do not see how this is possible. |
| branmakmuffin |
Posted - 26 Apr 2003 : 17:45:08
Artalis, I agree with you from a rule standpoint, but there's something that just seems not right about an Outsider being able to ignore one part of its alignment.
Isn't it the case that if a sword is +2 versus evil and +2 versus chaotic that it's +4 versus chaotic evil? Assuming I'm correct, I don't offer this as proof in the monk case, just as an example of something along similar lines.
In the paladin case, I think paladins are as lawful as they are good. In 1e, however, it did say that atoning for a chaotic act (I think a neutral act would be hard to define) was easier than for an evil act. In fact, I think for an evil act, 1e suggested that atonement was probably not possible and if it was, the paladin was stripped of his paladin powers until after the extremely diffifult atonement. |
| Artalis |
Posted - 26 Apr 2003 : 17:33:17
I disagree, the text says that the Monk becomes a "Lawful Outsider" it is the Lawful portion of the Monk's alignment that is of concern.
IMO it is the Lawful portion of a monks alignment that is the overriding factor ie. it seems to me that they are the most concerned with law and order and following the rules of their order with the "Morals" portion of their alignment coming second.
Now Paladins I would say, have it the other way. Maybe (at least in my campaign and of course depending on thier patron deity) they would consider the Good to be of paramount concern while trying to remain lawful in their approach to doing good.
I would say that for a Paladin, atonement for a chaotic or neutral act would be much eaisier than atoning for an evil act, again depending on patron deity and how severe the action was in violation of the code. |
| zemd |
Posted - 26 Apr 2003 : 15:18:30
I'd say that it extends to the other part of the alignement. I don't know why it wouldn't |
| Bookwyrm |
Posted - 26 Apr 2003 : 03:23:29
I don't see any reason why not. The PHB says "such as . . ." like it were an example, so I would assume it would extend to the good/evil parts. |
|
|
