| Author |
 Topic  |
|
oldskool
Acolyte
USA
31 Posts |
 Posted - 19 Jan 2005 : 10:00:05
|
OK, this may not seem like a "grey" moral issue, but for some reason, some of my players are up in arms about my ruling.
One of the spellcasters just got to the level at which Animate Dead became available. I run a "no evil PC" campaign, for many reasons. He (and another player) is arguing that animating skeletons and zombies is not inherently evil.... While my ruling was that in 95% of cases or more, animating dead is evil.
His argument is this: "I'm not harming their soul - since it is already departed. And it really shouldn't be a big deal when I animate fallen evil foes."
My argument is that any use of this spell is considered at LEAST equivalent to grave robbing, and at worst, a perversion of all things good and holy. Also, why do good priests bless the newly dead in order to keep them from being animated in this way, if using their bodies as some kind of junior-league golems ISN'T an evil act?
I have one half of the party ready to "take their ball and go home" if I make using "animate dead" an evil act, and the other just as likely to bug out if I cave in. I realize that I, as DM, should have the final say, but people can be really ego-centric about their little pet conceptions of D&D morality.
Talking this out and reasoning does not seem to be helping this situation. And "laying down the DM law" might be even worse. What to do?
oldskool
possibly a goody-two-shoes
|
DM: "You see a gazebo ahead of you."
Player: "What is it doing? I draw my weapon and charge!"
DM: "It's not doing anything. It's a gazebo."
Player: "Oh.. um. Then I'll cast a fireball at it!" |
|
|
Garen Thal
Master of Realmslore
USA
1105 Posts |
Posted - 19 Jan 2005 : 10:40:18
|
There is absolutely no ruling involved here. According to the rules, spells with the Evil descriptor are categorically evil acts. While Neutral characters are willing to commit evil acts to accomplish their goals, and even Good characters will occasionally commit evil acts "for the greater good," animating a corpse is evil, plain and simple.
In support of your argument (yanno, other than the Evil descriptor, which is on the spell), consider the following:
p. 8, Book of Vile Darkness has a heading 'Evil Acts,' subheadings of which include 'Animating the Dead or Creating Undead,' and 'Casting Evil Spells,' both of which are categorized as wholly evil, regardless of intent.
Personally, I do not believe that the soul is wholly departed, and that is what makes undeath such a mockery. No matter how long gone a person's soul is, it will forever contain some connection to the expired body. When animated, that connection is pulled, causing torment to the soul and preventing its proper rest. That is why the existense of undead is so horrible: it is not merely a mockery of life to the living, but a real and horrible torment of a deceased mortal.
Hopefully, if the "that's already the rule" line doesn't work, this explanation will appease the cranky players. |
 |
|
|
oldskool
Acolyte
USA
31 Posts |
Posted - 19 Jan 2005 : 10:43:58
|
quote:
Originally posted by Garen Thal
There is absolutely no ruling involved here. According to the rules, spells with the Evil descriptor are categorically evil acts. While Neutral characters are willing to commit evil acts to accomplish their goals, and even Good characters will occasionally commit evil acts "for the greater good," animating a corpse is evil, plain and simple.
Ah, I feel like a dink for not noticing the "Evil" descriptor.
But thank you for presenting me with the most powerful form of DM argument -- the bloody RULES.
oldskool |
DM: "You see a gazebo ahead of you."
Player: "What is it doing? I draw my weapon and charge!"
DM: "It's not doing anything. It's a gazebo."
Player: "Oh.. um. Then I'll cast a fireball at it!" |
|
|
|
Garen Thal
Master of Realmslore
USA
1105 Posts |
Posted - 19 Jan 2005 : 11:11:04
|
| I'm always glad to help. Feel free to use the lengthier, in-character explanation to back up why the spell has the Evil descriptor when your players revolt. |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36880 Posts |
Posted - 19 Jan 2005 : 11:23:42
|
You could always let him do it once, and then have him be attacked by zealous priests of Kelemvor for disturbing the dead...  |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen!  |
|
|
|
Mystery_Man
Senior Scribe
USA
455 Posts |
Posted - 19 Jan 2005 : 19:35:26
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
You could always let him do it once, and then have him be attacked by zealous priests of Kelemvor for disturbing the dead...
Heh, or have them rebuke.
"Oh you can't rebuke because you're of good alignment? They turn on you."
You were very correct in your ruling skool. Sounds like they were putting up a fuss because they didn't get their way. |
|
|
|
oldskool
Acolyte
USA
31 Posts |
Posted - 20 Jan 2005 : 00:27:17
|
I appreciate all these replies... I know it's a fairly cut-and-dried ruling, but geez, players can be the biggest birches. Oops, I think I made a typo there.
I mean, it IS just a game. (although one most of us are exceptionally serious about and somewhat obsessed with)
*shrug* But an Evil descriptor is an Evil descriptor, no matter how you slice it.
Just hope my animate-happy players don't SPAZ on me. |
DM: "You see a gazebo ahead of you."
Player: "What is it doing? I draw my weapon and charge!"
DM: "It's not doing anything. It's a gazebo."
Player: "Oh.. um. Then I'll cast a fireball at it!" |
|
|
|
Vecna
Acolyte
Turkey
8 Posts |
Posted - 21 Jan 2005 : 11:13:35
|
I dont think raising corpses are evil  but then I myself is an risen corpse.. (not risen, not ever fallen) If it was evil, I wouldn't do it to myself. And theres this faction in sigil named The Dustman,
they pay for your corpse while you live. and claim your corpse after you die. Thus it is not grave robbing. Grave robbing maybe against the laws of the country but paying for corpses maybe not.
Time for philosophical speech.
As I know. There are two souls in one body.. One is your core being..
the one which resides safe in my placthery for example. or the one which when you die will journey to the Mount Celestia. The other soul is bestial, more basic soul which is found in everything. Rocks, Mountains, Trees, rivers. Then You depart, it stays on your body.. |
IF THERE IS LIFE AFTER DEATH, THERE IS NO DEATH.
AND IF DEATH DOES NOT EXIST, WE DO NOT LIVE.
|
|
|
|
Red-Tide
Acolyte
8 Posts |
Posted - 25 Jan 2005 : 21:34:47
|
This is what I would do...
First explain how the rules read (its evil no matter how you slice it). Then I would allow them to do as they will. If they do it anyway, I impose either EXP point penalties or maybe an alignment shift.
I have found that players will push the envelope no matter what you do. I teach them a lesson when they continually challenge things, whether it be a catastrophic event or something that is totally debilitating, I make sure it lasts a session or 2 so it sinks in. If they continue being a serious disturbance beyond this I ask them not to play with the group anymore if they plan to continue with said behaviour. You'd be surprised how quickly they change their tune when confronted as such. I always say "I'm the DM, period" Im not a dick about it but I am firm.
my 2 cents |
Red Tide - Canadian Extreme Metal
www.infectingtheworld.com
www.myspace.com/redtideband |
|
|
|
Garen Thal
Master of Realmslore
USA
1105 Posts |
Posted - 25 Jan 2005 : 22:12:56
|
quote:
Originally posted by Red-Tide
First explain how the rules read (its evil no matter how you slice it). Then I would allow them to do as they will. If they do it anyway, I impose either EXP point penalties or maybe an alignment shift.
*WINCE*
In 3rd Edition, great pains were taken not to penalize characters for not playing their alignments. It's one thing to impose an alignment change--after all, if a character is acting a particular way, that's the character's alignment, not what appears on the character sheet--but quite another to say "you're not playing up to what you decided 4 months ago. That'll be 300 XP." |
|
|
|
Red-Tide
Acolyte
8 Posts |
Posted - 25 Jan 2005 : 23:03:01
|
1st. I wouldnt know about the 3E as I only play 2E (I will not replace the 200+ 2E items in my collection just to play new rules).
2nd. Why would you not use exp points as motivator/tool to keep players in line. It is the one thing they cant change (but you can).
of course this is just my opinion... |
Red Tide - Canadian Extreme Metal
www.infectingtheworld.com
www.myspace.com/redtideband |
|
|
|
Garen Thal
Master of Realmslore
USA
1105 Posts |
Posted - 25 Jan 2005 : 23:22:57
|
quote:
Originally posted by Red-Tide
1st. I wouldnt know about the 3E as I only play 2E (I will not replace the 200+ 2E items in my collection just to play new rules).
2nd. Why would you not use exp points as motivator/tool to keep players in line. It is the one thing they cant change (but you can).
Because an alignment is not an immutable facet of your character, like race or gender (both of which require magic to change). Alignment is a measurement --of personality, motivation, and action. Being a measurement, should be allowed to shift in accordance with what is being measured.
It was a failure of 2E to proclaim that "Alignment is a tool, not a strait-jacket," and then provide experience penalties for alignment shifts. 3rd Edition corrected that failure, at least in my opinion, and I can't agree with XP penalties for not abiding to what amounts to a measurement of a character's thoughts.
That isn't to say that I think XP awards for good roleplaying or XP penalties for poor roleplaying are bad ideas. Quite the opposite. I do, however, think that alignment isn't something to be roleplayed; it's something determined by how the character is played in the first place. |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36880 Posts |
Posted - 26 Jan 2005 : 05:36:39
|
I think we've gotten away from the gist of the original point... I agree with Red-Tide. If someone who is of a good alignment deliberately casts spells he knows are evil, and doesn't have an insanely good set of mitigating circumstances to make it necessary, then that person should by all means suffer (not immediately, but after repeated offenses) an alignment shift.
Sure, alignment shouldn't be a tool or straitjacket... But the scenario here is people acting against what they claim to believe in. It's like helping five little old ladies across the street, proclaiming yourself to be a good guy for doing that, and then drop-kicking a small furry WotC forum member into next week, just because they're there. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
|
|
|
Garen Thal
Master of Realmslore
USA
1105 Posts |
Posted - 26 Jan 2005 : 07:21:40
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
I think we've gotten away from the gist of the original point... I agree with Red-Tide. If someone who is of a good alignment deliberately casts spells he knows are evil, and doesn't have an insanely good set of mitigating circumstances to make it necessary, then that person should by all means suffer (not immediately, but after repeated offenses) an alignment shift.
Sure, alignment shouldn't be a tool or straitjacket... But the scenario here is people acting against what they claim to believe in. It's like helping five little old ladies across the street, proclaiming yourself to be a good guy for doing that, and then drop-kicking a small furry WotC forum member into next week, just because they're there.
My previous post may have been misunderstood. I of course believe that repeated actions contrary to a claimed alignment should force an alignment shift. I simply don't believe that the penalty for those actions should be an experience penalty.
To speak to the issue at hand, spells with the [Evil] descriptor are completely unavailable to good-aligned clerics and druids, and to neutral divine spellcasters that worship good deities. This means that even if casting animate dead were okay for good characters (and it's not), it probably wouldn't be available to the divine spellcasters in your campaign, oldskool. |
|
|
|
Mystery_Man
Senior Scribe
USA
455 Posts |
Posted - 27 Jan 2005 : 14:12:59
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
I think we've gotten away from the gist of the original point...
That and it looks like the problem is solved. Though I'm curious to what level if any the players Spazzed out.
quote:
....drop-kicking a small furry WotC forum member into next week, just because they're there.
I'd probably allow some lee-way on this one. |
|
|
|
Red-Tide
Acolyte
8 Posts |
Posted - 27 Jan 2005 : 21:56:41
|
I too am curious as to how you handled it and how your PC's reacted.
That said, I would never tell a player he was being penalized, I would just give him less experience points than the rest. |
Red Tide - Canadian Extreme Metal
www.infectingtheworld.com
www.myspace.com/redtideband |
|
|
|
Kentinal
Great Reader
4693 Posts |
Posted - 27 Jan 2005 : 22:57:00
|
quote:
Originally posted by Red-Tide
That said, I would never tell a player he was being penalized, I would just give him less experience points than the rest.
Err reduced awards tend to be noticed, if not the reason why. Which often leads to asking why did Joe annd Fred get more points then I did?
Depending of home rules of curse DM can award as many points they want and how they want to. To some degree even under core rules, there can be explainations in some cases. To stealth punish a player or the PC IMO is not the correct way to proceed. |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36880 Posts |
Posted - 27 Jan 2005 : 23:08:59
|
quote:
Originally posted by Elf_Friend
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
....drop-kicking a small furry WotC forum member into next week, just because they're there.
I'd probably allow some lee-way on this one.
I picked that one because I knew no one would object. If I had mentioned some other critter, it would have upset people. See how sensitive I am?  |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
|
|
|
Vecna
Acolyte
Turkey
8 Posts |
Posted - 27 Jan 2005 : 23:12:53
|
you should think about upgrading your game to 3rd ed. You dont have to dump your collection. You can convert anything so easyly.
I tried returning to 2nd ed for once.. (missed the old flavor) and I simply couldnt. it was too simple, too clumsy, too bad, too old.
|
IF THERE IS LIFE AFTER DEATH, THERE IS NO DEATH.
AND IF DEATH DOES NOT EXIST, WE DO NOT LIVE.
|
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36880 Posts |
Posted - 27 Jan 2005 : 23:55:27
|
quote:
Originally posted by Vecna
you should think about upgrading your game to 3rd ed. You dont have to dump your collection. You can convert anything so easyly.
I tried returning to 2nd ed for once.. (missed the old flavor) and I simply couldnt. it was too simple, too clumsy, too bad, too old.
'Tis true. Lore is lore, regardless of the edition. I won't get rid of my 2E stuff, or my 1E stuff, either, just because of 3E. It just means I have less cash and more need for shelves.  |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
|
|
|
Melfius
Senior Scribe
USA
516 Posts |
Posted - 28 Jan 2005 : 02:25:20
|
Okay, then. In line with this discussion, let me pose this situation to y'all and see how you would have handled it:
A wizard PC (myself, to be exact  ) rescued a town, with the help of some of his good friends, from a clan of goblins. At the end of the battles, the town was pretty beat up, what with houses being burned to the ground and all, and the townsfolk were facing a couple of really bad years as they wasted good planting/harvesting time rebuilding.
As a wizard, I took it upon myself to raise the corpses of the goblins (ala Animate Dead) and press the shambling corpses into service doing the rebuilding, so the poor townsfolk could continue the farming efforts. My reasoning was that they caused the mess, they should fix it, too.
Was this an evil act?
I'll let you know how my DM ruled it after y'all decide what you think! |
Melfius, Pixie-Priest of Puck - Head Chef, The Faerie Kitchen, Candlekeep Inn
"What's in his pockets, besides me?"
Read a tale of my earlier days! - Happiness Comes in Small Packages |
|
|
|
Red-Tide
Acolyte
8 Posts |
Posted - 28 Jan 2005 : 02:25:57
|
quote:
Err reduced awards tend to be noticed, if not the reason why. Which often leads to asking why did Joe annd Fred get more points then I did?
Depending of home rules of curse DM can award as many points they want and how they want to. To some degree even under core rules, there can be explainations in some cases. To stealth punish a player or the PC IMO is not the correct way to proceed.
So does this mean you just give everyone the same experience points even if someone was completly useless or not into it on a certain night? Thats wrong in my books.
As for 3E, its not about the rules guys... Dont matter what rules ya use as long as ya got a decent group of gamers. |
Red Tide - Canadian Extreme Metal
www.infectingtheworld.com
www.myspace.com/redtideband |
|
|
|
Kentinal
Great Reader
4693 Posts |
Posted - 28 Jan 2005 : 03:01:42
|
quote:
Originally posted by Red-Tide
quote:
Err reduced awards tend to be noticed, if not the reason why. Which often leads to asking why did Joe annd Fred get more points then I did?
Depending of home rules of curse DM can award as many points they want and how they want to. To some degree even under core rules, there can be explainations in some cases. To stealth punish a player or the PC IMO is not the correct way to proceed.
So does this mean you just give everyone the same experience points even if someone was completly useless or not into it on a certain night? Thats wrong in my books.
I said stealth deductions which is what you appear to advocate. Oh I will give Joe 1,000, Jane, 2,000 and Fred 500 , Oh Please do not get upset that your Character killed most of the foes, it is just the way I award experience points for roleplaying.
quote:
As for 3E, its not about the rules guys... Dont matter what rules ya use as long as ya got a decent group of gamers.
And it appears you are ready to burn any player anytime if not a decent roleplayer IYO, or doinf something that you considered out of alignment however not planing one telling the player why the NPC guard was awarded more experience points because the guard did not break any alignment rule.
Yes in answer to your question I would award the PC with the wqual share of experience points, I might impose alignment shift as well, though that has limited impact of non spell casters, and depending on situation make them a hero or criminal of the realm (This of course depends on the realms and actions).
Experience points are suspose to repersent gaining knowledge and training, While I think it poor that the system awards points for killing , for the most part, it is easier then awarding points for sucessful use of skills and can apropimate the unstated study in improving skills and feats.
There again I was never impressed with level drain, another experience point cost that makes small sense to me.
I do not believe acting out of alignment should result in experience point lose.
I certainly do not believe that experience point awards should be awarded on some stealth basics that the player does not know why he is getting far less then the other players are getting.
Now if you do tell a player I deducted 50 percent of your award for acting out of alignment, at least the player and you can discuss it.
If you do not you just create a situation of appearence, if not in fact, that players that you like advance quicker then players you do not like. |
|
|
|
Vecna
Acolyte
Turkey
8 Posts |
Posted - 28 Jan 2005 : 12:14:50
|
quote:
Originally posted by Melfius
Okay, then. In line with this discussion, let me pose this situation to y'all and see how you would have handled it:
A wizard PC (myself, to be exact ) rescued a town, with the help of some of his good friends, from a clan of goblins. At the end of the battles, the town was pretty beat up, what with houses being burned to the ground and all, and the townsfolk were facing a couple of really bad years as they wasted good planting/harvesting time rebuilding.
As a wizard, I took it upon myself to raise the corpses of the goblins (ala Animate Dead) and press the shambling corpses into service doing the rebuilding, so the poor townsfolk could continue the farming efforts. My reasoning was that they caused the mess, they should fix it, too.
Was this an evil act?
I'll let you know how my DM ruled it after y'all decide what you think!
I think it was not evil at all. Your action didnt harm anyone and after the task you would reliese them right? (wrong? ) and you did it for the greater good. But how the villagers responded to this?
did thay cowered in fear? If you make them understand the situation well. it is good. If I were the DM I would award you with xp and respect and good reaction from the village-folk |
IF THERE IS LIFE AFTER DEATH, THERE IS NO DEATH.
AND IF DEATH DOES NOT EXIST, WE DO NOT LIVE.
|
|
|
|
Kentinal
Great Reader
4693 Posts |
Posted - 28 Jan 2005 : 14:12:26
|
quote:
Originally posted by Melfius
As a wizard, I took it upon myself to raise the corpses of the goblins (ala Animate Dead) and press the shambling corpses into service doing the rebuilding, so the poor townsfolk could continue the farming efforts. My reasoning was that they caused the mess, they should fix it, too.
Was this an evil act?
I'll let you know how my DM ruled it after y'all decide what you think!
Well based on descriptor (Evil) it certainly was an evil act by the rules.
The circumstance is a little different then normal use of the spell. Evil creatures bodies being used to repair some of the damage they caused. Restitution does sound like a proper punishment.
There tend to be a few components that some will consider evil.
1) Desecration of a body, some believe the dead should not be defaced or vilplated, animate certainly can be a desecreation of a body.
2) Forcing another to do what they do not want to do, slavery. Some would consider this an evil act even if the body is dead.
3) With in game terms, drawing on negitive plane might be considered evil as well, if that interpertation is used to explain the source of the magic.
That said, it strikes me as an act of Justice, Nuetral, at that point in time. Though after repairs are completed I would watch to see what was done with the undead. |
Edited by - Kentinal on 28 Jan 2005 17:01:41 |
|
|
|
Melfius
Senior Scribe
USA
516 Posts |
Posted - 28 Jan 2005 : 15:48:45
|
Okay, let me add this then:
After the reconstruction was complete, the undead were destroyed. I didn't want them around stinking up the place, so we burned them. |
Melfius, Pixie-Priest of Puck - Head Chef, The Faerie Kitchen, Candlekeep Inn
"What's in his pockets, besides me?"
Read a tale of my earlier days! - Happiness Comes in Small Packages |
|
|
|
Kentinal
Great Reader
4693 Posts |
Posted - 28 Jan 2005 : 17:06:15
|
quote:
Originally posted by Melfius
Okay, let me add this then:
After the reconstruction was complete, the undead were destroyed. I didn't want them around stinking up the place, so we burned them.
Perhaps a form of justice. I would not impose alignment shift, for use of the spell in this manner. The goblins were dead and could have been burned sooner, but in the interest of justice they were compelled to repair the damage they caused. Not an Evil act, unless one considers Justice Evil, as oposed to some Justice systems being Evil. |
|
|
|
oldskool
Acolyte
USA
31 Posts |
Posted - 30 Jan 2005 : 00:58:45
|
quote:
Originally posted by Kentinal
quote:
Originally posted by Melfius
Okay, let me add this then:
After the reconstruction was complete, the undead were destroyed. I didn't want them around stinking up the place, so we burned them.
Perhaps a form of justice. I would not impose alignment shift, for use of the spell in this manner. The goblins were dead and could have been burned sooner, but in the interest of justice they were compelled to repair the damage they caused. Not an Evil act, unless one considers Justice Evil, as oposed to some Justice systems being Evil.
This is my player's basic argument... that it is the USE the animated dead are put to rather than the ACT of animating the dead.
I can really see both sides of it. BUT, since you are drawing on either (A) evil spirits or (B) the Negative Material (and possibly evil spirits there too) to accomplish this... it's still arguably dabbling in "black" magic.
Look at it from a different angle. If a CoC character summoned Cthulhu (or any of that ilk) to destroy another irredeemably evil being, would that make the character any less tainted by the touch of darkness??
It's more than just the material world when you mess with spells.
How about the other side of the coin, an evil or neutral PC casting a spell with the Good descriptor? Do they become seduced by goodness?? Should their alignment start to "lean" towards good?
oldskool |
DM: "You see a gazebo ahead of you."
Player: "What is it doing? I draw my weapon and charge!"
DM: "It's not doing anything. It's a gazebo."
Player: "Oh.. um. Then I'll cast a fireball at it!" |
|
|
|
Kentinal
Great Reader
4693 Posts |
Posted - 30 Jan 2005 : 01:25:53
|
quote:
Originally posted by oldskool
This is my player's basic argument... that it is the USE the animated dead are put to rather than the ACT of animating the dead.
This is the theory I tend to follow myself. I can see rare occasions that use of some spells normally evil are good in how they are used.
quote:
I can really see both sides of it. BUT, since you are drawing on either (A) evil spirits or (B) the Negative Material (and possibly evil spirits there too) to accomplish this... it's still arguably dabbling in "black" magic.
Err all magic can be called black magic, or ocult (hidden), because of the nature of magic. However in general the magic in FR comes though the Weave. I am not a big fan of nehitive of positive planes as source of good and evil, it does not scan well for me.
quote:
Look at it from a different angle. If a CoC character summoned Cthulhu (or any of that ilk) to destroy another irredeemably evil being, would that make the character any less tainted by the touch of darkness??
If could dismiss the being, I would say it was not evil or corrupting, the rules and perhaps your opinion might disagree with this.
quote:
It's more than just the material world when you mess with spells.
How about the other side of the coin, an evil or neutral PC casting a spell with the Good descriptor? Do they become seduced by goodness?? Should their alignment start to "lean" towards good?
Any that meses with magic are dealing with a dark art. Even a healing spell could result in more evil then good. That blade barrier will can any alignment, part water when duration ends can kill many. I am very much of what the spell goal is not the descriptor added by the game system.
As for casting a descroptor Good spell for fairness no evil character should have access to them by rule deffinition.
Though IIRC there is no simalar restriction and the good spell certainly could be used to evil purposes. |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36880 Posts |
Posted - 30 Jan 2005 : 03:35:44
|
quote:
Originally posted by oldskool
How about the other side of the coin, an evil or neutral PC casting a spell with the Good descriptor? Do they become seduced by goodness?? Should their alignment start to "lean" towards good?
oldskool
I'd say not. Evil is more likely to use any tools that it can, so magic would certainly fall into that category. Neutral types wouldn't be quite as ready to allow the ends to justify the means, but they'd not rule it out. Good types, on the other hand, must weigh their actions against their own moral compass. They are not likely to let the ends justify the means...
Or, to state it another way: Good types walk a straight and narrow path. The further you stray from the path, the harder it is to get back on it. The evil types might take a step or two down that path, but unless they are strong-willed and determined to continue, they'll go back to the easy route.
My two cents on this whole debate: calling an unwilling creature back from its death is bad. Using the creature's body, after death, even for good causes, is a perversion of life. No matter the intent, re-animating a body after the soul is departed is wrong (unless you restore full life to it). Further, I don't see it as justice -- for justice is not only meant to serve the wronged, but also, if possible, to show the perpetrator the error of their ways. A mindless undead, forced into involuntary servitude, is not seeing the error of its ways -- especially if it is dismissed immediately therafter.
As a DM, how would I handle this situation? I'd make it clear that the character had committed an evil act, no matter his intent. They'd have to make some sort of check (most likely a wisdom check), or else take some sort of penalty for doing this dead. This penalty would most likely be docked XP points.
If the character was a cleric, their deity might require atonement for this act. Alternatively, the deity could cause all of the character's spells to be less effective than usual for a few days. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
|
|
|
Melfius
Senior Scribe
USA
516 Posts |
Posted - 30 Jan 2005 : 03:36:21
|
I guess that would be the bottom line: would a Good character have spells in his/her spellbook with the 'Evil' descriptor? I would think not.
As for my situation: I was awarded XP for animating the goblins to rebuild, none for destroying them, and then had my PC 'chewed out' by a ranking official of the Harpers (who we were working for) for exposing the townsfolk to disease and other nasty things.
Badically, it became an object lesson. While I did right in my own mind, there were other ramifications I hadn't considered and was 'brought to task' for them. While role-playing-wise I did a good thing (hence the role-play XP), my reputation within the Harpers took a hit for not thinking before I acted. |
Melfius, Pixie-Priest of Puck - Head Chef, The Faerie Kitchen, Candlekeep Inn
"What's in his pockets, besides me?"
Read a tale of my earlier days! - Happiness Comes in Small Packages |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Divisive player-DM-player argument...
