Ok, so I know the Spirit Vessels has been talked to death (ha) on the forums, but I had a question on a topic I haven't found yet.
Spirit Vessels (Su): You can channel wendo spirits into lifeless bodies, reanimating them to aid you. Necromancy spells that create undead lose the evil descriptor when you cast them. Mindless undead created by your magic are of neutral alignment, while thinking undead possess your alignment. When using the animate dead spell, you can control 6 HD worth of undead creatures per caster level rather than 4 HD. In addition, any zombies or juju zombies you create using animate dead, create undead, or similar spells possess maximum hit points.
Spirit Vessels' ability to create non-evil undead was an oversight, and this behavior is not intended. Gamemasters are encouraged to treat undead created with this ability as having evil alignment.
Emphasis mine.
Ok, so my question is: do the spells still lose the Evil descriptor? The Dev team would suggest that that part might be altered as well, since if you are bringing unholy abominations into existence, it's more than likely an evil act. On the other hand, it could theoretically be excused as some odd karma loophole that Juju oracles get access to.
I'm a bit up in the air at the moment, so anyone else have thoughts?
|
Paizo has officially banned/ret-conned out the Juju Zombie/Oracle, and a lot of other stuff. It's also not allowed in PFS, but as written, yes through the Juju materials, you can create non-evil Undead, if your GM will allow it. Note that a lot of Paladin and Cleric powers don't specify Evil Undead, just Undead, (or evil), and from the fluff most individuals still see the juju Undead as abominations. Most Juju priests are evil, as well, so very little actually changes, beyond technically they might not be Evil Undead.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I would say that based on the retconned RAI, necromancy spells would keep the evil descriptor.
That said, I use the juju mystery as written. I'm perfectly fine with juju oracles creating neutral undead.
|
|
Personally, Im not sure why it turned out to be an Oracle thing. To me it seems much more Cleric to a lesser extent Druid and Wizard flavor territory. I also have no issue with non-evil Undead. I fail to see why any mindless undead are evil, and plenty of room for many intelligent undead to resist their darker urges, case by case by type.
I think oracle fit the best in terms of flavor, being vessels of forces from beyond the physical realm without a lot of knowledge as to the how and why. In terms of other classes like it, I think that the best overall fit would have been witch, honestly. Lots of similarities. Still, I'm glad to have a juju mystery. Makes my next character a little more interesting.
I've never really understood the mindless undead as being evil. Act of creation (desecrating corpses, possibly preventing a soul from passing on, etc) I can understand as evil acts, but a skeleton who's freed just wanders around killing things that offend it...which is what a lot of mindless monsters do anyway and they tend to be neutral. In the case of the juju mystery, I can get it's less 'creating evil undead' and more 'borrowing a body so this spirit can help me' or maybe just a 'mysterious ways' handwave.
IIRC, Blood of the Night mentions vampires can sometimes fall into a neutral alignment after a freeing themselves from a master and they have a sort of alignment whiplash, and a very, very select few can be good, though it's nearly impossible. Of course, this act in accordance with the 'undead must be evil thing' because *SMOKEBOMB*
Yeah, it was errata-ed to be still evil because Paizo, for whatever reason, has a hard-on for "always evil acts".
Well, er, wouldn't you think it'd be a bit less fragile if less acts were evil or good regardless of intent?
|
|
I'm not sure, to be honest. I can see it both ways on that because alignment in the game is not subjective at all. It is and is meant to be 100% absolute, this is evil, this is lawful, and that is good. Its less that and more that some acts just dont really seem to logically fit except for mechanical reasons. Its also that people dont agree on the absolutes, but also want to dig deeper and insert a bit of subjectivity, so for example have a culture that does not see undead as unholy evil, ecause they have some flavor that doesnt mesh with it. Or a Cleric of Good that raises undead to prevent a further lose of actual life.
I thought that unintelligent undead were just powered by negative energy, not souls?
I was thinking along the lines of ghosts. You know, souls unable to pass on because unfinished business. Desecrating remains tends to lead to bad things, and I tend to think that ghosts might spring up from them.
Yeah, it was errata-ed to be still evil because Paizo, for whatever reason, has a hard-on for "always evil acts".
However, said errata applies (or should) only to Golarion, where it is assumed that undead (with the exception of Ghosts) are always evil.
|
Yeah, it was errata-ed to be still evil because Paizo, for whatever reason, has a hard-on for "always evil acts".However, said errata applies (or should) only to Golarion, where it is assumed that undead (with the exception of Ghosts) are always evil.
That actually isn't true. Undead are *almost* always evil in Golarion, but there are non-ghost exceptions (eg. one intelligent zombie NPC in Godsmouth Heresy). Same goes for other "always" evil entities - demons are "always CE" but apparently there's a CG succubus slated to appear in Wrath of the Righteous.
There's no denying that, but judging from the way Paizo has spoken of things like Drizz't, it's as if they had a disdain for these exceptions.
They like black and white morality as far as I can tell. Other than Skull and Shackles I can't think of any AP that dips into the gray either.