paizo.com Recent Posts in Magic And Alignmentspaizo.com Recent Posts in Magic And Alignments2014-04-21T20:57:13Z2014-04-21T20:57:13ZRe: Forums: Rules Questions: Magic And AlignmentsLincoln Hillshttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2qww5&page=2?Magic-And-Alignments#872014-04-24T21:08:39Z2014-04-24T21:08:39Z<p>I suppose there comes a point where, if you really want to be Neutral Good, you have give up your plans to blow up the earth. Alas!</p>I suppose there comes a point where, if you really want to be Neutral Good, you have give up your plans to blow up the earth. Alas!Lincoln Hills2014-04-24T21:08:39ZRe: Forums: Rules Questions: Magic And Alignmentsseebshttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2qww5&page=2?Magic-And-Alignments#862014-04-24T18:59:28Z2014-04-24T18:59:28Z<p>It's not entirely incompatible with the quasi-magnetism model of "alignment". Good alignment is what happens when you act in a way aligned with good a lot.</p>It's not entirely incompatible with the quasi-magnetism model of "alignment". Good alignment is what happens when you act in a way aligned with good a lot.seebs2014-04-24T18:59:28ZRe: Forums: Rules Questions: Magic And AlignmentsLarkoshttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2qww5&page=2?Magic-And-Alignments#852014-04-24T16:24:37Z2014-04-24T16:24:37Z<p><a href="http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2l7ns&page=767?Ask-James-Jacobs-ALL-your-Questions-Here#38341" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"> It appears that James Jacobs has answered this question if anyone still cares.</a> </p>
<p>It's question 16 on that huge list. I personally disagree but he is as close to Word of God as we're gonna get.</p>It appears that James Jacobs has answered this question if anyone still cares.
It's question 16 on that huge list. I personally disagree but he is as close to Word of God as we're gonna get.Larkos2014-04-24T16:24:37ZRe: Forums: Rules Questions: Magic And AlignmentsAkerlof (alias of Zach Klopfleisch)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2qww5&page=2?Magic-And-Alignments#842014-04-23T21:34:33Z2014-04-23T21:34:33Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Vildrean wrote:</div><blockquote><br />
<br />
Another Example:</p>
<p>A Paladin cast on himself Bed Of Iron, Does he loss all his Paladin powers because it's a Necromancy Spell?.
<br />
</blockquote><p>A good hint is that you really, really don't expect to see a spell on a Paladin's spell list that will cause him to fall.
<p>By the normal rules, there's nothing special about necromancy spells as related to alignment. The only spells that inherently interact with the alignment system are the ones with an alignment listed in their type. Now, in your GM's world all necromancy might be evil, and that's your GM's prerogative. But it's not that way by default. And if it is, your GM should remove any necromancy spells from the Paladin's spell list so there aren't any traps hiding in the wings.</p>Vildrean wrote:Another Example:A Paladin cast on himself Bed Of Iron, Does he loss all his Paladin powers because it's a Necromancy Spell?.
A good hint is that you really, really don't expect to see a spell on a Paladin's spell list that will cause him to fall. By the normal rules, there's nothing special about necromancy spells as related to alignment. The only spells that inherently interact with the alignment system are the ones with an alignment listed in their type. Now, in your GM's...Akerlof (alias of Zach Klopfleisch)2014-04-23T21:34:33ZRe: Forums: Rules Questions: Magic And AlignmentsCardinal Chunder (alias of Spacelard)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2qww5&page=2?Magic-And-Alignments#832014-04-23T20:09:41Z2014-04-23T20:09:41Z<p>If the designers wanted casting spells with either good or evil descriptors to change PCs alignments surely it would have been stuck in errata and clearing it up once and for all rather than playing around with Crane Wing, Weapon Cords, Amulet of Might Fists, Brass Knuckles, etc...</p>
<p>Animate Dead is a very corner case at best as people have mentioned intent is much more important. I can remember an article waaaaaaay back in the depths of time saying even LG Clerics would be okay casting it for the purposes of training acolytes. Kinda leaving my body to medical science thing.</p>
<p>EDIT: Anyway none of this matters, we are all right and we are all wrong, its the internet. All boils down to "Ask your GM" :D</p>If the designers wanted casting spells with either good or evil descriptors to change PCs alignments surely it would have been stuck in errata and clearing it up once and for all rather than playing around with Crane Wing, Weapon Cords, Amulet of Might Fists, Brass Knuckles, etc...
Animate Dead is a very corner case at best as people have mentioned intent is much more important. I can remember an article waaaaaaay back in the depths of time saying even LG Clerics would be okay casting it for...Cardinal Chunder (alias of Spacelard)2014-04-23T20:09:41ZRe: Forums: Rules Questions: Magic And AlignmentsLarkoshttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2qww5&page=2?Magic-And-Alignments#822014-04-23T19:54:12Z2014-04-23T19:54:12Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Nearyn wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Larkos wrote:</div><blockquote>For the last time, Casting Animate Dead is evil</blockquote><p>Larkos... why would you write this, when I've already informed you that casting a spell is not an aligned action according to the core rules?
<p>The alignment descriptor, by the rules, have no significance other than for interaction with Protection spells and Cleric magic. All significance outside of that is at GMs discretion and thus houserule territory.</p>
<p>The rule that [evil] casting is an evil act is an optional rule specific to the Golarion setting. Why do I even have to repeat that?</p>
<p>It is not appropriate to tout that "For the last time, Casting Animate Dead is evil" as if it's actually a rule out of the alignment chapter. Because it's not. </p>
<p>-Nearyn </blockquote><p>I've also said that creation of the undead by any means is evil for several reasons. I have <b>never</b> said that casting is an aligned action. I'm saying that this specific spell because of what it does is inherently evil. Undead are inherently evil and making one can't be good. It's the reason why Vampires and Liches are also inherently evil. I grant you that the spell description doesn't explicitly state that it is evil except through the descriptor which you seem to reject offhand but how can creating something inherently evil be a good thing?
<p>Hellfire ray to kill an orc that was about to murder a three-year-old? Fine. That's good. I would let you keep your alignment. Creating a permanent evil creature that seeks only to consume and destroy the living unless commanded otherwise? I can't let that be considered good. It's too much of a bad starting point to allow for anything to balance it out. Especially if there's any alternative. I can't imagine a situation where creation of the undead is the only option to achieve a good end.</p>
<p>Your point about killing is something I feel like I want to agree with but there are examples where killing isn't evil. Killing a villain that can be jailed safely and has surrendered to you is pretty evil. Killing a villain who's too powerful to be safely held by anyone is more morally grey. the paladin might not go for that but a LG fighter could probably get away with it without an alignment shift. Basically you're not right but you're not wrong either.</p>Nearyn wrote:Larkos wrote:For the last time, Casting Animate Dead is evil
Larkos... why would you write this, when I've already informed you that casting a spell is not an aligned action according to the core rules? The alignment descriptor, by the rules, have no significance other than for interaction with Protection spells and Cleric magic. All significance outside of that is at GMs discretion and thus houserule territory.
The rule that [evil] casting is an evil act is an optional rule...Larkos2014-04-23T19:54:12ZRe: Forums: Rules Questions: Magic And Alignmentsseebshttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2qww5&page=2?Magic-And-Alignments#812014-04-23T19:32:51Z2014-04-23T19:32:51Z<p>You know, that is actually a fair and valid point.</p>
<p>Although I suppose we ought to ask "wait, <i>whose</i> blood?"</p>You know, that is actually a fair and valid point.
Although I suppose we ought to ask "wait, whose blood?"seebs2014-04-23T19:32:51ZRe: Forums: Rules Questions: Magic And AlignmentsNearynhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2qww5&page=2?Magic-And-Alignments#802014-04-23T19:29:47Z2014-04-23T19:29:47Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">seebs wrote:</div><blockquote> If you want to have a real alignment discussion, we should probably pick a different thread,</blockquote><p>I can think of few things I want -less- than an alignment discussion :D
<p>I actually think that right now I'd prefer seeing blood in my urine than another alignment discussion.</p>
<p>-Nearyn</p>seebs wrote:If you want to have a real alignment discussion, we should probably pick a different thread,
I can think of few things I want -less- than an alignment discussion :D I actually think that right now I'd prefer seeing blood in my urine than another alignment discussion.
-NearynNearyn2014-04-23T19:29:47ZRe: Forums: Rules Questions: Magic And AlignmentsNearynhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2qww5&page=2?Magic-And-Alignments#792014-04-23T19:28:39Z2014-04-23T19:28:39Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Rynjin wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Nearyn wrote:</div><blockquote>Of course killing is evil. Killing has always been evil.</blockquote><p>To who?
<p>Not the majority of the world for the majority of human recollection, it hasn't.</p>
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Nearyn wrote:</div><blockquote>That is why the heroes defeat the villain and send him off to jail, rather than kill him, whereas the villain kills those he wish.</blockquote>Well yeah if you ignore 99% of mythology, stories like Conan the Barbarian, Indiana Jones, James Bond, etc., and really ANYTHING except superhero comics/cartoons. </blockquote><p>Valid observation.
<p>-Nearyn</p>Rynjin wrote:Nearyn wrote:Of course killing is evil. Killing has always been evil.
To who? Not the majority of the world for the majority of human recollection, it hasn't.
Nearyn wrote:That is why the heroes defeat the villain and send him off to jail, rather than kill him, whereas the villain kills those he wish.
Well yeah if you ignore 99% of mythology, stories like Conan the Barbarian, Indiana Jones, James Bond, etc., and really ANYTHING except superhero comics/cartoons. Valid...Nearyn2014-04-23T19:28:39ZRe: Forums: Rules Questions: Magic And Alignmentsseebshttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2qww5&page=2?Magic-And-Alignments#782014-04-23T19:23:04Z2014-04-23T19:23:04Z<p>If you want to have a real alignment discussion, we should probably pick a different thread, and we should start by making sure everyone involved knows what "deontological", "teleological", and "virtue-based" ethical systems are. Otherwise, there's simply no point in trying to have the conversation.</p>
<p>I'm in a fussy mood myself, so I'm going to refrain from observing the bitter-and-rude response, since I'd probably get snappish. If you can offer a citation for "killing is evil" that isn't just based on "evil implies killing", I'd be interested in seeing one. I've not yet found one, and I've been debating the D&D 3E/Pathfinder alignment systems with people for about 13 years now.</p>If you want to have a real alignment discussion, we should probably pick a different thread, and we should start by making sure everyone involved knows what "deontological", "teleological", and "virtue-based" ethical systems are. Otherwise, there's simply no point in trying to have the conversation.
I'm in a fussy mood myself, so I'm going to refrain from observing the bitter-and-rude response, since I'd probably get snappish. If you can offer a citation for "killing is evil" that isn't just...seebs2014-04-23T19:23:04ZRe: Forums: Rules Questions: Magic And AlignmentsRynjinhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2qww5&page=2?Magic-And-Alignments#772014-04-23T19:22:52Z2014-04-23T19:22:52Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Nearyn wrote:</div><blockquote>Of course killing is evil. Killing has always been evil.</blockquote><p>To who?
<p>Not the majority of the world for the majority of human recollection, it hasn't.</p>
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Nearyn wrote:</div><blockquote>That is why the heroes defeat the villain and send him off to jail, rather than kill him, whereas the villain kills those he wish.</blockquote><p>Well yeah if you ignore 99% of mythology, stories like Conan the Barbarian, Indiana Jones, James Bond, etc., and really ANYTHING except superhero comics/cartoons.Nearyn wrote:Of course killing is evil. Killing has always been evil.
To who? Not the majority of the world for the majority of human recollection, it hasn't.
Nearyn wrote:That is why the heroes defeat the villain and send him off to jail, rather than kill him, whereas the villain kills those he wish.
Well yeah if you ignore 99% of mythology, stories like Conan the Barbarian, Indiana Jones, James Bond, etc., and really ANYTHING except superhero comics/cartoons.Rynjin2014-04-23T19:22:52ZRe: Forums: Rules Questions: Magic And AlignmentsNearynhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2qww5&page=2?Magic-And-Alignments#762014-04-23T18:57:02Z2014-04-23T18:57:02Z<p>[Spoiler omitted]</p>
<p>What a bitter outburst. Your comment ticked me off more than I should have allowed it to. If you took offense to what I wrote, sorry.</p>
<p>Instead I'll just say: I respectfully disagree with your points and encourage you to accept that a rules citation has been provided, and that perhaps it is not as bad a rule as you might think it is.</p>
<p>Have a nice day.</p>
<p>-Nearyn</p>[Spoiler omitted]
What a bitter outburst. Your comment ticked me off more than I should have allowed it to. If you took offense to what I wrote, sorry.
Instead I'll just say: I respectfully disagree with your points and encourage you to accept that a rules citation has been provided, and that perhaps it is not as bad a rule as you might think it is.
Have a nice day.
-NearynNearyn2014-04-23T18:57:02ZRe: Forums: Rules Questions: Magic And Alignmentsseebshttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2qww5&page=2?Magic-And-Alignments#752014-04-23T18:54:28Z2014-04-23T18:54:28Z<p>The spell is aligned-with-evil, but it's not necessarily the case that this makes it An Evil Act. Although come to think of it, I think 3E did have a specific rule that casting a spell with an alignment descriptor counted as an act of that alignment.</p>
<p>Pathfinder seems to have rationalized-away the "but what if an outsider [evil] is converted" by declaring that if a devil were to cease being lawful evil, it would cease to be a devil. Which turns out not to help because it doesn't tell you what creature type it then is or what traits it has. But I think undead still work. Powerful undead detect as evil <b>even if they are good-aligned</b>.</p>The spell is aligned-with-evil, but it's not necessarily the case that this makes it An Evil Act. Although come to think of it, I think 3E did have a specific rule that casting a spell with an alignment descriptor counted as an act of that alignment.
Pathfinder seems to have rationalized-away the "but what if an outsider [evil] is converted" by declaring that if a devil were to cease being lawful evil, it would cease to be a devil. Which turns out not to help because it doesn't tell you what...seebs2014-04-23T18:54:28ZRe: Forums: Rules Questions: Magic And AlignmentsCaptain Wacky (alias of Nathan Hembree)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2qww5&page=2?Magic-And-Alignments#742014-04-23T18:48:38Z2014-04-23T18:48:38Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Nearyn wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Larkos wrote:</div><blockquote>For the last time, Casting Animate Dead is evil</blockquote><p>Larkos... why would you write this, when I've already informed you that casting a spell is not an aligned action according to the core rules?
<p>The alignment descriptor, by the rules, have no significance other than for interaction with Protection spells and Cleric magic. All significance outside of that is at GMs discretion and thus houserule territory.</p>
<p>The rule that [evil] casting is an evil act is an optional rule specific to the Golarion setting. Why do I even have to repeat that?</p>
<p>It is not appropriate to tout that "For the last time, Casting Animate Dead is evil" as if it's actually a rule out of the alignment chapter. Because it's not. </p>
<p>-Nearyn </blockquote><p>Here's the thing... the spell itsself is <b>marked</b> as evil in the book. It says "evil" in the descriptor. Animate Dead (to use as an example again) brings evil things into the world. Things that will kill anyone they see if you're not there to control them. That can be considered a form of oppression because everyone is under threat of these things should something happen to you, whether it is your intent or not.
<p>Unhallow, also marked as evil makes a year long Magic Circle Against Good (among other things). Any Evil can use this to their advantage, which aids people who are predisposed to kill, oppress and hurt others. If it's your spell, guess who aided them, even if it wasn't your intent (can you guess what road is paved with good intentions?), you still brought evil into the world.</p>
<p>The thing is, even if none of these things happen, the skeletons never hurt an innocent life, the Unhallow never aids a single bad guys, you are still opening it up for opportunity. You are giving it another avenue.</p>Nearyn wrote:Larkos wrote:For the last time, Casting Animate Dead is evil
Larkos... why would you write this, when I've already informed you that casting a spell is not an aligned action according to the core rules? The alignment descriptor, by the rules, have no significance other than for interaction with Protection spells and Cleric magic. All significance outside of that is at GMs discretion and thus houserule territory.
The rule that [evil] casting is an evil act is an optional rule...Captain Wacky (alias of Nathan Hembree)2014-04-23T18:48:38ZRe: Forums: Rules Questions: Magic And Alignmentsseebshttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2qww5&page=2?Magic-And-Alignments#732014-04-23T18:34:36Z2014-04-23T18:34:36Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Nearyn wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">seebs wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Quote:</div><blockquote>Killing is an evil act, not surprisingly.</blockquote>Uh. [citation needed].</blockquote><p>You should probably go back and read the post again mate. You'll find that citation has already been provided.
<div class="messageboard-quotee">seebs wrote:</div><blockquote>2. Nothing in the books says that killing is in and of itself an evil act. </blockquote>•cough• </blockquote><p>No citation was provided, and the claim absolutely cannot be true. <b>If killing is in and of itself an evil act, then any paladin who kills immediately loses their paladin powers, because they lose their powers if they perform any evil act.</b>
<p>I'm guessing you are engaging in the logical fallacy of "affirming the consequent", which is to say, assuming that "A implies B" means "B implies A". The books do say that evil implies killing. <b>That does not mean that killing implies evil.</b></p>
<p>Evil implies killing <b>without qualms</b>, and in particular, killing <b>innocents</b>. Good implies protecting <b>innocent</b> life, but not necessarily all life. Heck, I think the 3E DMG used "making a significant extra effort to make sure a hag gets killed and not merely driven off" as a good example of exceptionally-good behavior on the part of a paladin.</p>
<p>Like I said, if you have an actual citation for an official rule stating that killing is <b>in and of itself</b> inherently evil, I'd love to see it.</p>Nearyn wrote:seebs wrote: Quote:Killing is an evil act, not surprisingly.
Uh. [citation needed].You should probably go back and read the post again mate. You'll find that citation has already been provided. seebs wrote:2. Nothing in the books says that killing is in and of itself an evil act.
*cough* No citation was provided, and the claim absolutely cannot be true. If killing is in and of itself an evil act, then any paladin who kills immediately loses their paladin powers, because they...seebs2014-04-23T18:34:36ZRe: Forums: Rules Questions: Magic And AlignmentsCaptain Wacky (alias of Nathan Hembree)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2qww5&page=2?Magic-And-Alignments#722014-04-23T17:54:57Z2014-04-23T17:54:57Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">thejeff wrote:</div><blockquote> You can use evil spells without immediately changing alignment, even in the harshest interpretation of the setting rules. But they taint you and using them excessively will shift your alignment. </blockquote><p>Which is the point I was driving at... but in a much more, long-winded fashoin.thejeff wrote:You can use evil spells without immediately changing alignment, even in the harshest interpretation of the setting rules. But they taint you and using them excessively will shift your alignment.
Which is the point I was driving at... but in a much more, long-winded fashoin.Captain Wacky (alias of Nathan Hembree)2014-04-23T17:54:57ZRe: Forums: Rules Questions: Magic And Alignmentsthejeffhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2qww5&page=2?Magic-And-Alignments#712014-04-23T17:45:34Z2014-04-23T17:45:34Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Captain Wacky wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Rynjin wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">thejeff wrote:</div><blockquote> For the obvious more modern take, why should a Jedi be turned to the Dark Side just for using his anger. Shouldn't it only be what he does with the anger that matters? </blockquote><p>As far as I know, per the Expanded Universe stuff this is the case. I'm not a big Star Wars fan (far from it, really...) but IIRC it's clarified that simply using anger is not enough, it must be tempered into pure baseless hatred and then used for despicable acts before you're truly fallen to the Dark Side.
<p>Even classically Dark Side powers (like Force Lightning and Choke) can be safely used by Light Side people as long as they realize that they're merely tools for a purpose...and that tool is not at all universally applicable. </blockquote><p>Not to turn this into a Star Wars debate... but.
<p>Yes, you have to temper it into hatred before you fall. Yes you can use anger and not fall. However, the Force controls the actions of Jedi and Sith as much as they control it. As you use it, so it changes you.</p>
<p>Dark side powers <b>require</b> anger and hatred to use, they're not just tools, they are extensions of your feelings. As you use them, those feelings get stronger until you fall. So, can you use dark side powers and not fall? Yes, once, maybe twice depending on the amount of anger in said Jedi. But it's Not safe or without consiquence, the taint of using your feelings in such a way leaves a stain that other Jedi and Sith can sense. The Force is apart of you and you apart of it. Using the dark side is accepting that darkness and inviting it in, you're allowing it to change you and become apart of you in order to use those powers. </blockquote><p>Well, I was more using it as an analogy and basing it on my vague pre-Expanded Universe memories, but I still think the analogy holds.
<p>You can use evil spells without immediately changing alignment, even in the harshest interpretation of the setting rules. But they taint you and using them excessively will shift your alignment.</p>Captain Wacky wrote:Rynjin wrote: thejeff wrote: For the obvious more modern take, why should a Jedi be turned to the Dark Side just for using his anger. Shouldn't it only be what he does with the anger that matters?
As far as I know, per the Expanded Universe stuff this is the case. I'm not a big Star Wars fan (far from it, really...) but IIRC it's clarified that simply using anger is not enough, it must be tempered into pure baseless hatred and then used for despicable acts before you're...thejeff2014-04-23T17:45:34ZRe: Forums: Rules Questions: Magic And AlignmentsCaptain Wacky (alias of Nathan Hembree)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2qww5&page=2?Magic-And-Alignments#702014-04-23T17:32:38Z2014-04-23T17:32:38Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Rynjin wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">thejeff wrote:</div><blockquote> For the obvious more modern take, why should a Jedi be turned to the Dark Side just for using his anger. Shouldn't it only be what he does with the anger that matters? </blockquote><p>As far as I know, per the Expanded Universe stuff this is the case. I'm not a big Star Wars fan (far from it, really...) but IIRC it's clarified that simply using anger is not enough, it must be tempered into pure baseless hatred and then used for despicable acts before you're truly fallen to the Dark Side.
<p>Even classically Dark Side powers (like Force Lightning and Choke) can be safely used by Light Side people as long as they realize that they're merely tools for a purpose...and that tool is not at all universally applicable. </blockquote><p>Not to turn this into a Star Wars debate... but.
<p>Yes, you have to temper it into hatred before you fall. Yes you can use anger and not fall. However, the Force controls the actions of Jedi and Sith as much as they control it. As you use it, so it changes you.</p>
<p>Dark side powers <b>require</b> anger and hatred to use, they're not just tools, they are extensions of your feelings. As you use them, those feelings get stronger until you fall. So, can you use dark side powers and not fall? Yes, once, maybe twice depending on the amount of anger in said Jedi. But it's Not safe or without consiquence, the taint of using your feelings in such a way leaves a stain that other Jedi and Sith can sense. The Force is apart of you and you apart of it. Using the dark side is accepting that darkness and inviting it in, you're allowing it to change you and become apart of you in order to use those powers.</p>
<p><b>Edit</b> To expand on this a bit, force lightning, isn't electricity, it's raw dark side given form.</p>Rynjin wrote:thejeff wrote: For the obvious more modern take, why should a Jedi be turned to the Dark Side just for using his anger. Shouldn't it only be what he does with the anger that matters?
As far as I know, per the Expanded Universe stuff this is the case. I'm not a big Star Wars fan (far from it, really...) but IIRC it's clarified that simply using anger is not enough, it must be tempered into pure baseless hatred and then used for despicable acts before you're truly fallen to the...Captain Wacky (alias of Nathan Hembree)2014-04-23T17:32:38ZRe: Forums: Rules Questions: Magic And AlignmentsNearynhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2qww5&page=2?Magic-And-Alignments#692014-04-23T17:20:44Z2014-04-23T17:20:44Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Larkos wrote:</div><blockquote>For the last time, Casting Animate Dead is evil</blockquote><p>Larkos... why would you write this, when I've already informed you that casting a spell is not an aligned action according to the core rules?
<p>The alignment descriptor, by the rules, have no significance other than for interaction with Protection spells and Cleric magic. All significance outside of that is at GMs discretion and thus houserule territory.</p>
<p>The rule that [evil] casting is an evil act is an optional rule specific to the Golarion setting. Why do I even have to repeat that?</p>
<p>It is not appropriate to tout that "For the last time, Casting Animate Dead is evil" as if it's actually a rule out of the alignment chapter. Because it's not. </p>
<p>-Nearyn</p>Larkos wrote:For the last time, Casting Animate Dead is evil
Larkos... why would you write this, when I've already informed you that casting a spell is not an aligned action according to the core rules? The alignment descriptor, by the rules, have no significance other than for interaction with Protection spells and Cleric magic. All significance outside of that is at GMs discretion and thus houserule territory.
The rule that [evil] casting is an evil act is an optional rule specific to the...Nearyn2014-04-23T17:20:44ZRe: Forums: Rules Questions: Magic And AlignmentsCaptain Wacky (alias of Nathan Hembree)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2qww5&page=2?Magic-And-Alignments#682014-04-23T17:12:34Z2014-04-23T17:12:34Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Larkos wrote:</div><blockquote> I think the single act of casting a spell can totally change your alignment if it's evil enough. "I dominate a 5-year-old and tell him to jump in a vat of hydrochloric acid." Seems pretty evil to me and that's without the evil descriptor. Casting Blasphemy, which does have the evil descriptor, on a village in order to kill everyone in it is pretty capital "E" Evil. I wouldn't hesitate for one second to give you a one-way ticket to the deep end of the alignment pool. You'd also have to do some serious atonement to make up for that one. </blockquote><p>Well, the above, yes. But I was distinguishing between simply casting a spell and action taken with said spell. Simply casting a dominate spell isn't evil. Dominating a 5 year old to throw themselves into a vat of acid is, but that's the ation you take with the spell and not the spell in and of itsself.
<p>By contrast I'm stating that casting Animate Dead is, in and of itsself, an act of evil, even if you do good with it and the good you do with it outweighs the bad, it is still an act of evil.</p>
<p>I'm not suggesting at all that a singular casting of an evil spell, by itsself, should shift your alignment. I'm saying repeated casting of evil spells plays (or should) a role in overall alignment.</p>
<p>For example casting an evil spell to take down an Orc to save the life of a child? I'd say <b>overall</b> you did a good thing, you used an evil spell (minor evil act) in order to save a kid (large good act).</p>Larkos wrote:I think the single act of casting a spell can totally change your alignment if it's evil enough. "I dominate a 5-year-old and tell him to jump in a vat of hydrochloric acid." Seems pretty evil to me and that's without the evil descriptor. Casting Blasphemy, which does have the evil descriptor, on a village in order to kill everyone in it is pretty capital "E" Evil. I wouldn't hesitate for one second to give you a one-way ticket to the deep end of the alignment pool. You'd also...Captain Wacky (alias of Nathan Hembree)2014-04-23T17:12:34ZRe: Forums: Rules Questions: Magic And AlignmentsNearynhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2qww5&page=2?Magic-And-Alignments#672014-04-23T17:12:05Z2014-04-23T17:12:05Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">seebs wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Quote:</div><blockquote>Killing is an evil act, not surprisingly.</blockquote>Uh. [citation needed].</blockquote><p>You should probably go back and read the post again mate. You'll find that citation has already been provided.
<div class="messageboard-quotee">seebs wrote:</div><blockquote>2. Nothing in the books says that killing is in and of itself an evil act. </blockquote><p>•cough•seebs wrote:Quote:Killing is an evil act, not surprisingly.
Uh. [citation needed].You should probably go back and read the post again mate. You'll find that citation has already been provided. seebs wrote:2. Nothing in the books says that killing is in and of itself an evil act.
*cough*Nearyn2014-04-23T17:12:05ZRe: Forums: Rules Questions: Magic And AlignmentsRynjinhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2qww5&page=2?Magic-And-Alignments#662014-04-23T17:04:43Z2014-04-23T17:04:43Z<p>The descriptors aren't the problem. They were around before the ruling that they actually had an important impact on mechanics.</p>
<p>Much like alignment itself, it's good for a quick reference but is absolute inconsistent garbage when it comes to interacting with literally anything that isn't itself.</p>
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Quote:</div><blockquote>Creation of the undead is not a "minor act of evil" even if you just use the zombies to do housework for an impoverished village. If you're wondering why, it's probably because of corpse desecration and creation of a permanent-until-destroyed, inherently evil being that could outlast you and then go on a rampage.</blockquote><p>[Citation Needed]
<p>They never give a reason, just "it is".</p>
<p>And they're never going to give a reason, and if you ask why they'll just say "Because we made it that way".</p>
<p>The fact that you have to come up with a justification by yourself to validate the existence of this rule is proof enough it wasn't very well thought out at all.</p>
<p>Thankfully though, it was in a silly splatbook and isn't actually binding rules text from one of the core books, so I can safely ignore that junk and get on with my day.</p>
<p>Until someone reminds me it exists again and I become re-frustrated.</p>
<div class="messageboard-quotee">thejeff wrote:</div><blockquote><br />
<br />
For the obvious more modern take, why should a Jedi be turned to the Dark
<br />
Side just for using his anger. Shouldn't it only be what he does with the anger that matters? </blockquote><p>As far as I know, per the Expanded Universe stuff this is the case. I'm not a big Star Wars fan (far from it, really...) but IIRC it's clarified that simply using anger is not enough, it must be tempered into pure baseless hatred and then used for despicable acts before you're truly fallen to the Dark Side.
<p>Even classically Dark Side powers (like Force Lightning and Choke) can be safely used by Light Side people as long as they realize that they're merely tools for a purpose...and that tool is not at all universally applicable.</p>The descriptors aren't the problem. They were around before the ruling that they actually had an important impact on mechanics.
Much like alignment itself, it's good for a quick reference but is absolute inconsistent garbage when it comes to interacting with literally anything that isn't itself.
Quote:Creation of the undead is not a "minor act of evil" even if you just use the zombies to do housework for an impoverished village. If you're wondering why, it's probably because of corpse...Rynjin2014-04-23T17:04:43ZRe: Forums: Rules Questions: Magic And Alignmentsthejeffhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2qww5&page=2?Magic-And-Alignments#652014-04-23T17:01:59Z2014-04-23T17:01:59Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Rynjin wrote:</div><blockquote><p> None of those are the result of casting the spell, however, which is why it's dumb to have aligned spells.</p>
<p>Using spells to do evil things is Evil, period.</p>
<p>Using spells to do good things is Good, period.</p>
<p>That SHOULD be the extent of it.</p>
<p>But nooooo, we have to have some silly addition to the rules from a campaign setting book that says if I cast Animate Dead and use the creations for good purposes, I committed a minor act of Evil.</p>
<p>Which is dumb, plain and simple. </blockquote><p>Right. Because Undead are evil in and of themselves.
</p>
Using demonic power, even trying to do so for good purposes, is evil in and of itself.
<br />
There are various sources of power in the setting that are in fact evil. Using them is evil. </p>
<p>You don't have to like it. You don't have to use it in your setting or even in your home games in Golarion. It's a well established trope in the fantasy genre and while I wouldn't always use it, I like having it supported. </p>
<p>The idea of the wizard trying to use dark powers for altruistic purposes and finding himself twisted and corrupted by them is found throughout the genre. It's a fun thing to play around with sometimes. </p>
<p>For the obvious more modern take, why should a Jedi be turned to the Dark
<br />
Side just for using his anger. Shouldn't it only be what he does with the anger that matters?</p>Rynjin wrote:None of those are the result of casting the spell, however, which is why it's dumb to have aligned spells.
Using spells to do evil things is Evil, period.
Using spells to do good things is Good, period.
That SHOULD be the extent of it.
But nooooo, we have to have some silly addition to the rules from a campaign setting book that says if I cast Animate Dead and use the creations for good purposes, I committed a minor act of Evil.
Which is dumb, plain and simple.
Right....thejeff2014-04-23T17:01:59ZRe: Forums: Rules Questions: Magic And AlignmentsLarkoshttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2qww5&page=2?Magic-And-Alignments#642014-04-23T16:58:37Z2014-04-23T16:58:37Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Rynjin wrote:</div><blockquote><p> None of those are the result of casting the spell, however, which is why it's dumb to have aligned spells.</p>
<p>Using spells to do evil things is Evil, period.</p>
<p>Using spells to do good things is Good, period.</p>
<p>That SHOULD be the extent of it.</p>
<p>But nooooo, we have to have some silly addition to the rules from a campaign setting book that says if I cast Animate Dead and use the creations for good purposes, I committed a minor act of Evil.</p>
<p>Which is dumb, plain and simple. </blockquote><p>The three biggest reasons I can think of for adding the good/evil/lawful/chaotic descriptors are these:
<p>1. Clerics can't cast opposed alignment spells i.e. good clerics can't cast evil spells. The descriptors make it clear which spells are banned for them.</p>
<p>2. Certain abilities are affected by good/evil spells i.e. the Aasimar FCB for sorcerers "Add +1/4 to the sorcerer's caster level when casting spells with the good descriptor."</p>
<p>3. As a guideline for GMs so they which spells probably aren't appropriate for people to cast. An CN oracle casting Arrow of Law probably shouldn't happen even without a strict restriction on Oracles like the clerics get. </p>
<p>"But nooooo, we have to have some silly addition to the rules from a campaign setting book that says if I cast Animate Dead and use the creations for good purposes, I committed a minor act of Evil.</p>
<p>Which is dumb, plain and simple."</p>
<p>Creation of the undead is not a "minor act of evil" even if you just use the zombies to do housework for an impoverished village. If you're wondering why, it's probably because of corpse desecration and creation of a permanent-until-destroyed, inherently evil being that could outlast you and then go on a rampage. If you, as GM, decide that these reasons aren't enough to have it considered an act of evil then that's cool but good/evil/lawful/chaotic descriptors aren't bad in and of themselves.</p>Rynjin wrote:None of those are the result of casting the spell, however, which is why it's dumb to have aligned spells.
Using spells to do evil things is Evil, period.
Using spells to do good things is Good, period.
That SHOULD be the extent of it.
But nooooo, we have to have some silly addition to the rules from a campaign setting book that says if I cast Animate Dead and use the creations for good purposes, I committed a minor act of Evil.
Which is dumb, plain and simple.
The three...Larkos2014-04-23T16:58:37ZRe: Forums: Rules Questions: Magic And Alignmentsseebshttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2qww5&page=2?Magic-And-Alignments#632014-04-23T16:51:26Z2014-04-23T16:51:26Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Quote:</div><blockquote>Killing is an evil act, not surprisingly.</blockquote><p>Uh. [citation needed].
<p>1. If "killing is an evil act", then yes, it instagibs your paladin powers.
<br />
2. Nothing in the books says that killing is in and of itself an evil act.</p>Quote:Killing is an evil act, not surprisingly.
Uh. [citation needed]. 1. If "killing is an evil act", then yes, it instagibs your paladin powers.
2. Nothing in the books says that killing is in and of itself an evil act.seebs2014-04-23T16:51:26Z