How many times can an Neutral creature cast an Evil spell (like animate dead) before its alignment changes to Evil?
The Fiendish Codex II has a system for tracking acts that alter alignment, giving each act a score. Once you've accumlated a certain number of 'Corruption Points' or something you become evil. It has casting an evil spell at 1 corruption point.
Personally, I think that the nuetral character can cast evil spells but not become evil. As long as he casts the spells for the right reasons and doesn't cast them maliciously then he is still nuetral. If he began to sadistically and maliciously cast evil spells for personal pleasure or poiwer rather than the greater good, then he becomes evil. I use an alignment system with much looser alignment rules; there are a lot more grey areas the way that I play it.
Additional commentary on the use of good and evil spells in the Book of Exalted Deeds (possibly the Book of Vile Darkness as well, but I don't remember just now) and the effects of said spells on alignment. No quantitative values are given, i.e. 10 castings of protection from good will make you evil, or 1 casting of gate if you summon a balor. IIRC the Book of Exalted Deeds says that use of spells can, eventually, change your alignment over time. The implied timeframe was pretty long, though.
As far has points tracking for alignment goes, the Advanced Player's Manual from Green Ronin has a system for this.
|
I tend to ignore the [evil] descriptor.
If the party's LG Cleric casts Deathwatch a hojillion times to make sure that he heals the people most in need of *immediate* healing, then it doesn't matter that it's got the [evil] descriptor, he's not on any sort of 'slippery slope' to baby-eatin' evilness.
If the party's LG Cleric uses Sound Burst just once during a parade to panic the horses and get dozens of people trampled to death because 'it would be funny,' then he's in trouble, regardless of the fact that Sound Burst is not an [evil] spell.
If there were some sort of cold numerical number of [evil] spells a neutral Cleric could cast before 'turning evil,' then there would, logically, also be a set number of [good] spells be could cast before 'turning good.'
"'Kay, I Inflicted Light Wounds on the bandit that got too close to me, I Death Knelled the leader for a pick me up, and then I Animated Dead on the rest of the bandits and had them carry their loot home for me. That's six spell levels of [evil], so I'm gonna have to cast six Protection from Evils, or three Summon Monster II's (Celestial Giant Bee), to balance that out. I'll also say two, "Hail Pelor's" and throw some silver coins to the beggars, just to be sure. Wouldn't want the gods to think I'm gaming the system..."
It's all about intent and action / consequences for me. I don't see any situations where Death Knell isn't gonna count as an evil act, regardless of the descriptor, and I don't see how the [good] descriptor makes Summoning a bunch of Celestial animals and having them eat up a bunch of nuns and orphans isn't an equally evil act, despite the [good] descriptor involved in the spellcasting.
Alignment isn't mechanical, IMO.
Well said, Set.
Agreed.
Make it a third, I wholeheartedly agree.
I usually say that casting spells with teh evil descriptor is just a spell descriptor. Its like a spell with the fire descriptor.
The ONLY time it matters is for clerics. I ruled that good aligned gods do not grant evil spell if they are prayed for.
So its not really possible to change alignment from casting evil spells.
I usually say that casting spells with teh evil descriptor is just a spell descriptor. Its like a spell with the fire descriptor.
The ONLY time it matters is for clerics. I ruled that good aligned gods do not grant evil spell if they are prayed for.
So its not really possible to change alignment from casting evil spells.
Nice.
|
It's all about intent and action / consequences for me....Alignment isn't mechanical, IMO.
Well said!
As with experience points, after a while, a DM gets a feel for what seems 'appropriate', and should adjust accordingly. Whenever a rigid system is used for either (no matter what it is), as soon as the players get wind of it, they'll be playing the system and whoring every point out of it.
I regret to say I've been in games where 2 players have been told they were 5xp off levelling up, and half the party was murdered over who got the right to kill a wandering giant rat. Or when the players discovered the DM was giving out 25xp for every 'act of charity', so a scuffle broke out over who got to give 1gp to every beggar in the street on '25-for-the-price-of-one-day' ("Hey! We only get 1xp/gp if we hand it to the Guildmaster!").
Similarly, if the players are told that "Good act X will cancel Evil act Y", then they'll simply manipulate the game to ensure that they always have a spell memorised (or a wand to hand) that alignment drift never becomes a problem. Despite what the 4E proponents would have you believe, PCs DO NOT run out of spells under normal play conditions...
I myself have not done so for the last 13 levels, and I believe my many underlings and henchmen in the Cagebreakers (or at least, those with the wit to cast spells) would concur with me. If I actually cared one wit about my alignment, beyond as a way of currying favour with the mighty staff 'Alakast' (and were not constantly keeping my Goodometer topped up by slaughtering fiends and evildoers), I could easily ensure I had a few 'Care Bear Castings' left over to fool the bleeding-heart Heironeans in my employ! As it is, I believe I have enough credit built up that I can let loose the Baklunish Jihad with extreme prejudice without fear of reproval! It's not evil if your victims are evil! Or Suloise!
Take that, 'Master Fetor'! Feel your insides ripped out through your nostrils, you degenerate corpse-fondler! Think you can buy me, like a common trinket; me, a person so obviously your racial superior in every way?!?! Get a taste of what I gave Odo the Whip, on the Scarlet Brotherhood's slave-hulk! It wasn't the sharks that got him, Oh No! It's because of your kind I learned how to hide, to sneak, to conceal a blade (or 5) on my person, and I didn't need the rookeries of Greyhawk to teach me to kill, either! My only regret is that you're trapped in a globe of silence, so you can't hear me taunting you in your last agonising seconds! If I had the time, I'd take my time over you, but my idiot servant Darmargo has got himself killed by a dracolich, and I have to organise my panicking headless-chicken retainers!
I don't have any hard and fast rules about how many [evil] spells one must cast to become evil, but casting [evil] spells with any regularity definately will make a character evil. If done only in extenuating circumstances and for the right reasons, I won't change a PC's alignment to evil, but it is a very slippery slope. I've seen people argue that [evil] spells cannot change one's alignment, but that always sounded like saying that pushing old ladies into moving traffic cannot change one's alignment. I can understanding a DM just removing the [evil] tag from some or all spells via house rules, but if you're playing by RAW I think the [evil] tag is a red flag for any non-evil aligned caster.
|
|
The ONLY time it matters is for clerics. I ruled that good aligned gods do not grant evil spell if they are prayed for.
That's actually a rule. From the SRD.
Chaotic, Evil, Good, and Lawful Spells
A cleric can’t cast spells of an alignment opposed to his own or his deity’s (if he has one). Spells associated with particular alignments are indicated by the chaos, evil, good, and law descriptors in their spell descriptions.
So its not really possible to change alignment from casting evil spells.
Unless one is neutral, as some Clerics are. I believe that was the point from NineSouls original post. :)
And there's always the risk of that same neutral Cleric turning Chaotic or Lawful from Summoning too many Slaad or casting too many Protection from Chaos spells...
Yeah if you are any class that casts arcane spells you can cast evil descriptor spells with no penalty. Its what you do with the spell that may effect your alignment.
My good wizard casts evil summoning spells all the time. I look at it as bending an evil creature to my will and making fight for the cause of good.
So with clerics and divine casters they dont even have access to evil spells if they worship good gods. So its hard to even get around that restriction to even make it an issue (scrolls and magic items).
well, this seems to beg the question for good guys; why would a good guy cast an evil spell; most cannot even if they wanted to; nuetrals might have this problem;
I suggest using the taint rules in the UA. If you graph character alignments like I do, then this sort of thing is no problem; i give everyone 100 points in each of their alignment aspects when they start a character; so a CG person has 100 chaotic points and 100 good points; each action they do that constitues some big alignment choice; i give them a few points towards one of the 9 alignments; as long as their other alignments dont get within 20 of their base alignment they are ok; within 20 is alignment trouble; 20 more than base alignment is a shift; so with your example; say a person cast a 3rd level evil spell; will I would give them 3 evil points each time toward their alignment; same for good or chaos spells.
in other posts I have much more detailed alignment stuff; feel free to read it if this interests you; my players have commented over and over how this system helps them understand alignments for their characters.
I would say the problem with death knell is that it's considered an [evil] spell at all. I think changing the descriptor is a better solution than just ignoring the fact that a spell is marked as [evil] (as Tequila mentioned earlier).
By the rules of the game, an [evil] spell is evil. You are tapping into a fundamental pool of elemental evil. There's no two ways around it. Mitigating circumstances can't change the fact that the spell is [evil]. Assuming we could all agree on the definition of murder, then achieving good ends through the use of murder doesn't change the fact that one murdered and that murder is evil (assuming that was part of the definition, which it more than likely would be since we're talking about murder and not "simply" killing).
Now, should there be a case where a PC is more or less forced to use an [evil] spell, their alignment isn't in danger because they haven't made an actual choice- the act has been forced upon them (scenarious and situations in general might do this). Although, I must say that I think it unlikely a PC would find him- or herself forced to use an [evil] spell. It's much likelier that they would find themsevles forced to commit some evil act, but using the spell would requiring learning and perhaps even preparing it (depending on the class) which becomes an increasingly unlikely situation for a PC to find him- or herself forced into.
But simply saying "Well, I'm trying to do good with this spell," and using that as a blanket excuse for casting any number of [evil] spells you like, isn't going to cut it. At some point, you'll turn evil, too. Take note of this, Arctaris. I've no problem if Talia does eventually become evil in my PbP; she may continue to act exactly the same. But creating undead is still evil, and whatever other virtues a person might have won't stop the stat block from reading "evil" for alignment if they rampantly use [evil] spells.
|
|
I would say the problem with death knell is that it's considered an [evil] spell at all. I think changing the descriptor is a better solution than just ignoring the fact that a spell is marked as [evil] (as Tequila mentioned earlier).
You meant Deathwatch, I think. Death Knell is pretty darn evil, regardless of [tag]. :)
By the rules of the game, an [evil] spell is evil. You are tapping into a fundamental pool of elemental evil. There's no two ways around it.
Most of the [evil] spells actually tap into the Negative Energy Plane, a fundamental pool of elemental 'meh' that is neither evil-aligned, evil-aspected, nor occupied by evil natives. It's all neutral. They even have a specific designation for planes that are 'kinda, sorta' tilted in the direction of evil, and the Negative Energy Plane isn't even *a little bit* evil.
It's a dangerous place, but the Positive Energy Plane is equally dangerous, and spells that tap into the Positive Energy Plane aren't [good] (appropriately, since the Positive Energy Plane and it's natives are no more good aligned than the Negative Energy Plane and it's Xeg-yi natives are evil aligned).
So Negative Energy Plane, not evil. Casting spells that use it's power, evil, and you'll go, uh, somewhere evil, like the Nine Hells, 'cause the Negative Energy Plane is technically not an appropriate destination for evil souls that tap it's power...
Short, short version? Absolute mechanical representation of moral or ethical alignments = awkward and kludgy.
|
To me, the use of evil magic should be weighed against the character's intent, and the end effect.
To use a non-magical example, Torture. Torture itself is an evil act and there can be seen as two types(refering to the 3.5 Ravenloft guides); Routine and Sadistic.
Good people have used torture as a means of trying to doing good. Such acts are done with the intent that the greater good is served. Whether this is actually the case is up to debate. An in-game example would be a Chaotic Good Fighter torturing an enemy combatant to find out where the evil villain is, so that the party can stop a plague. This would be an example of Routine Torture. Sometimes refered to in the real world as "hostile interrogation".
In a game, I would likely allow two such uses of this, at the most, before the CG Fighter becomes CN. You also have to weigh the inaction of the other party members, because by allowing an evil act to occur can be said to be an evil act itself.
This should be a slippery slope for characters.
Sadistic Torture, or torture for its own sake is a purely evil act, and would automaticly shift a LG, CG, or NG character's alignment.
Likewise, spells that inherently evil can be used for good(A Paladin using an Inflict Spell on someone who attacks him), albeit to a lesser extent than they can be used for evil. Similarly, spells that are inherently good can be used for evil, as well.
Well, Jesus did tell to forgive seventy times seven (Matt. 18:21-22), so I guess by the time the character commits 491st evil act, the alignment changes...
Or the other option as mentioned by Set, there shouldn't be hard-set mechanism.
Evil acts in general should give stress to changing the alignment (same for good acts), but a lot depends on intent, situation, etc.
Couple of times players themselves have commented that mabe it's time to change the alignment of their character, or comment on other characters's actions...if the group in general is interested in playing such matters.
|
|
It's all about intent and action / consequences for me....Alignment isn't mechanical, IMO.I myself have not done so for the last 13 levels, and I believe my many underlings and henchmen in the Cagebreakers (or at least, those with the wit to cast spells) would concur with me. If I actually cared one wit about my alignment, beyond as a way of currying favour with the mighty staff 'Alakast' (and were not constantly keeping my Goodometer topped up by slaughtering fiends and evildoers), I could easily ensure I had a few 'Care Bear Castings' left over to fool the bleeding-heart Heironeans in my employ! As it is, I believe I have enough credit built up that I can let loose the Baklunish Jihad with extreme prejudice without fear of reproval! It's not evil if your victims are evil! Or Suloise!
Take that, 'Master Fetor'! Feel your insides ripped out through your nostrils, you degenerate...
You, sir, are a man after my own heart. I bow to your understanding of morals.
|
|
You, sir, are a man after my own heart. I bow to your understanding of morals.
Someone has to oppose these Suloise albino corpse-fiddlers, to make the world a safe place for Flan, Oeridian and yes, Baklunish babies to skip hand in hand through the fruitful gardens and oases of the reborn Empire of the True Faith, once the Cup and Talisman are restored to us.
I kill because I must to safeguard the future for our children, and our children's children...
WON'T SOMEBODY THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!!!!!!!!!!
RPG Superstar 2013
|
If the party's LG Cleric uses Sound Burst just once during a parade to panic the horses and get dozens of people trampled to death because 'it would be funny,' then he's in trouble...
And he'd also be right. That would be funny.
A flip side of this is temptation and redemption stories. Just as it varies if you're trying to gain some power without being evil, it varies depending on how you want a former hero converted into a villain. You could argue that Vlad Tepes or Lord Soth suffered little or no moral erosion, and a single catalyst pushed them quickly over the edge, while Raistlin rationalized callous acts to further his art and defend his friends, ultimately embracing more and more vile acts to acheive his goal of eliminating Takhisis.
Alignment is definitely story-driven and not puraly mechanical, although the descriptors have to mean something so the game makes sense: good gods don't give out night's caress, and demons should have vulnerability to good spells.
Still {wrings hands nervously}, imagine all the good the Church of Pelor could do if their clerics could cast night's caress.
Yeah. Let Gondor use the weapon of the enemy against them.
I noticed something. We seem to have a lot of descriptors in the form [evil]. But not so many in the form [/evil]. So I will interpret that to mean it's not so easy to turn off the evil, once you turn it one. Subtle, how [evil] lures one ever onward, assuring one that all one needs is that little slash, and everything is okay.
[evil]PC[/evil]
...
Yeah, but it was funny to me. ]:^D>
Could it not be interpreted that [/evil] is the same as [good]? :P
Edit: According to my DB, there are 89 spells with the Good descriptor, as opposed to a whoppin' 235 with the Evil descriptor.
...fool the bleeding-heart Heironeans in my employ!
I would be rather more wary of the Heironean to whom you will eventually answer to rather than figments of your imagination... especially seeing as I can use evil stuff without penalty...
Having The Eye is cool
...a load of barely-restrained, frothing, mad-eyed lunacy...Go on, Matt; I know you're reading, and you're dying to comment on that last post...(Ho Ho!).
Can't find it. Sorry... I got your other one though - your characters grasp on reality is getting more tenuous by the day...
|
|
I would be rather more wary of the Heironean to whom you will eventually answer to rather than figments of your imagination... especially seeing as I can use evil stuff without penalty...
Since when?
Just because an enemy caster can't affect you with them, doesn't mean The Big H is happy for you to cast them straight back!Having The Eye is cool
"Oh, sorry, sir; I thought your hat was on fire!"
Just because an enemy caster can't affect you with them, doesn't mean The Big H is happy for you to cast them straight back!
I didn't mean spells - I meant items that cause damage to good aligned creatures. Just because an item creator didn't want his special ring to get into the hands of some paladin so made it alignment specific doesn't mean the item is inherently evil. Theoretically all weapons are evil as they are designed to cause death.
But it all comes back to the point several posters were making - intent.
Kaile is only going to use his powers for good, so 'the big H' should be cool with it...