Certain spells have the tag "evil" (without quotes) right next to the school of magic.
Three examples are Animate Dead, Blood Transcription and Nightmare.
Please note not all Evil aligns spells are from the school of magic Necromancy, however, it seems the majority are, just not all of them. It has been ruled at our table that the consistent use of such spells will result in an alignment shift.
My question to you is, should it?
Thanks for your time.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
That is certainly the intent of the designers. They've clarified this on these very boards a number of times.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I would say context matters when it comes to evil-aligned spells. Summoning a demon might be bad, but if you bind it and use it to rescue a dozen orphans, you've more than balanced the scales back towards good.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I would say context matters when it comes to evil-aligned spells. Summoning a demon might be bad, but if you bind it and use it to rescue a dozen orphans, you've more than balanced the scales back towards good.
How can you know? For all most PCs would know, summoning a demon and allowing it to operate in the mortal world empowers some kind of Prince in Hell. The metaphysics are very unclear and usually unknown to characters. There is no way to tell what the "value" is of rescuing puppies or orphans, or the "cost" of summoning creatures, demonic or otherwise.
A wizard can summon a creature of an opposing alignment outsider using a spell with that opposing alignment descriptor and have complete control over them.
An evil wizard can summon a good hound archon and have it devour innocent babies at an orphanage and torch the building to get the ones it can't reach.
A good wizard can summon an evil dretch to go physically rescue babies from that burning orphanage.
The evil summoner will create a temporary supernatural aura of [Good] from summoning the archon that is detectable with Detect Good. But he is an evil guy doing evil things, simply using supernatural [Good]. I can see an evil summoner liking the twisting of good to evil ends and using that as his preferred MO. I would not change the alignment on his sheet closer to good if he repeatedly summoned good creatures.
|
I would say context matters when it comes to evil-aligned spells. Summoning a demon might be bad, but if you bind it and use it to rescue a dozen orphans, you've more than balanced the scales back towards good.
Unlike a lot of morality style video games - I don't think that it actually works that way.
Theoretically - what if to save those dozen orphans - you had to murder an innocent? By that logic, it'd be a neutral act, maybe even good since your net is eleven lives saved. But no - it'd be evil. (Death Note style evil - what I think of as an anti-villain. The sort you ALMOST agree with some of the time.)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Well, blood transcription can highly encourage pseudo vampirism, and nightmare can be considered a form of torture.
Generally, outside of the cut and paste template nature of some spells like summoning, most spells labeled as evil tend to be sketch, and have few uses outside of sketch things.
So this should be more of an argument about whether a particular spell deserves the evil descriptor (ie- they are, by their nature, too sketch to that you would feel proud taking about them with your LG clergyman)
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
I generally play such spells have a corrupting influence and will slowly change the caster's alignment if used regularly.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The should it question is pretty vague. Do you mean should these spells be [evil], should casting an [evil] spell be an evil act or should repeated evil acts result in changing your alignment (if non-evil)?
Spells with an [evil] description is, in many ways, a flavor thing not a balance thing. There is no particular reason why most of these spells couldn't exist without an evil descriptor, but in the particular world/setting/rule system they have a biography and connections that make them innately corrupt.
As a good example, the spell infernal healing. I don't think anyone believes that there is anything innately evil about giving a creature fast healing. However, this particular spell is [evil]. One can speculate as to why and how, but the basic idea is that your are connecting someone with demonic powers and doing so is innately corrupting. In many cases it isn't clear exactly how or why a certain spell is [evil] while another isn't, that said, I think one could quite easily come up with rational explanations for the difference when it isn't spelled out.
I also think in most cases spell research could create alternate versions of these spells that were not evil. If infernal healing is possible, I don't see why angelic healing isn't.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Certain spells have the tag "evil" (without quotes) right next to the school of magic.
...It has been ruled at our table that the consistent use of such spells will result in an alignment shift.
My question to you is, should it?
As others have mentioned, that is the intent of the alignment descriptor within the game system. How many it takes depend on several other factors, including the interpretation of how alignments work for that particular group.
Basically you get into a discussion regarding ends and means. However, the game assumes an objective alignment system where evil acts (means) to accomplish a good goal (ends) are still considered evil (or Evil, Eeevviill, or EVIL, depending on the act, circumstances, and intent).
I'd say without having the mythic quality of beyond morality (or whatever its called), I'd say yes, using (Evil) spells should eventually have an Evil effect on you.
Part of the problem is that "sketch" is kind of a flexible term. For example-- Animate Dead. If a character uses it to revive a T-Rex (a wild animal-- is desecrating its corpse really significant to anybody?) to use as a mount, in what way is it evil?
Now, Animate Dead to revive all the dead folks who were laid to rest in a local cemetery, sure. That's almost certainly evil. I'm sure one could find a situation where one could defend even a Paladin's right to cast the spell in the local graveyard without falling, but it'd be a pretty narrow set of circumstances or a pretty odd Paladin.
Druids would picket your business if it was giving small children rides on animated dinosaur skeletons (which admittedly sounds awesome).
Overall, torturing small animals is typically viewed as a 'sign' of troubling behaviors.
Yes, there is a lot of moral wiggle room.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In my home game, spells with an alignment descriptor do NOT have an inherent effect on your alignment. What matters is how they are used.
In fact, I removed the descriptor from some spells that didn't quite strike me as actually deserving the descriptor.
I even altered the Infernal Healing spell and renamed it "Planar Healing," allowing the caster to choose where they draw their healing energy from, which then changes the descriptor on the spell in a manner similar to choosing different creatures from the Summon Monster lists change the descriptors. Drawing from a Good-aligned plane gives it the [Good] descriptor, drawing from the Plane of Fire gives it the [Fire] descriptor, and so on.
Sure, that has ramifications for characters with certain feats and abilities that modify caster level based on descriptor, but that's a minor issue.
Of course, I'm also one of those folks who doesn't think Negative Energy is inherently Evil, nor is Positive Energy inherently Good.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Casting an evil spell is an evil act. Evil acts can accumulate to result in an alignment shift (assuming you didn't start out as evil). Not all evil acts "weigh" equally, however.
Casting infernal healing on a dying orphan who just escaped the burning orphanage ahead of the blood-thirsty murder hobos is less evil than plotting the downfall and destruction of a nation of elves with armies of cacodaemons on retainer to deliver all of their souls to Szuriel. There is a lot of room in between.
Alignment changes and the acts that lead up them are intentionally (for better or worse) a qualitative rather than quantitative aspect of the game.
-TimD
IMO, yes, but most [evil] spells have the tag because they're creepy, and in D&D/PF creepy = evil.
Which is a very poor definition of [evil], IMO.
If I'm attacked by a T-Rex, kill it, then raise its corpse... where's the evil?
Casting the animate dead spell. That is the evil.
I'll admit one could imagine a world where that wasn't the case. However, clearly in the Pathfinder universe, it is, and it is the spell that is evil, not the use to which the undead is put (which may be further evil).
Admittedly there isn't an explanation as to why it is evil. But it isn't hard to come up with plausible reasons. It could be that casting this spell and dealing with the negative energies involved is innately corrupting and debasing. It could be that every casting of animate dead weakens the walls between the realms of the living and the dead, making spontaneous unread more likely. It could be that all life is innately sacred, and animating after death is a debased and immoral act.
We don't have a definitive reason why, but we do know that it is evil.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If I'm attacked by a T-Rex, kill it, then raise its corpse... where's the evil?
As others have pointed out - in some fluff you're actually trapping the animal's spirit into the zombie/skeleton in order to raise it.
In addition - I think of the evil descriptor in D&D/Pathfinder to be like force lightning. After all - why is using force lightning evil when cutting someone in half with a lightsaber isn't? The answer - the very act of doing it corrupts you. Maybe not the first time, but evenutally.
[Evil] subtype spells aren't evil, just creepy and disturbing. a good aligned character can cast infernal healing with no real mechanical repercussions or impact on their alignment, but they would be considered creepy amongst the ignorant like "why is he smearing devils blood on that orphan?" or "why is she smearing angel tears on that serf?" in the case of celestial healing.
just like Animating Undead to serve as laborers or a Vampire drinking blood to survive aren't evil, just creepy
i really don't like the idea of Creepy=Evil
the alignment descriptor of the spell is irrelevant, what really matters is the intent behind the caster using the spell and what they intend to actually do with it, a spellcaster who summons a hound archon to massacre a helpless elementary school for the pleasure of slaughter is doing an evil act, however, a spellcaster who summons a Vrock to save a child from a burning building is doing a good act. in fact, using infernal healing to save an innocent and helpless orphan's life without the intent to harm or corrupt them later is doing a good or even exhalted good act.
Casting an evil spell is an evil act. Evil acts can accumulate to result in an alignment shift (assuming you didn't start out as evil). Not all evil acts "weigh" equally, however.
Casting infernal healing on a dying orphan who just escaped the burning orphanage ahead of the blood-thirsty murder hobos is less evil than plotting the downfall and destruction of a nation of elves with armies of cacodaemons on retainer to deliver all of their souls to Szuriel. There is a lot of room in between.
Alignment changes and the acts that lead up them are intentionally (for better or worse) a qualitative rather than quantitative aspect of the game.-TimD
Pretty much where I stand on the matter. As long as an [Evil] tagged spell is used for good ends, you're probably not in danger of an alignment shift. Of course, there is an inherent risk of being corrupted by that kind of power, whether in the Dark Side sense or just in the usual way that power can corrupt.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
[Evil] subtype spells aren't evil
As far as the rules of the game go, and the default setting/expectation of Pathfinder, this is flat out incorrect.
House ruling things this way is fine of course.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If you cast an evil spell you are committing an evil act. Even if you do it for a good reason, it is still an evil act. You are good because of how you solve the problem. If you choose any means neccessary you are on the path to evil.
With that said unless you are a cleric or some other aligned restricted class then it does not matter if your alignment changes, and there is no rule on how much each evil act has on your alignment. That will fall to your GM.
Personally I leave alignments alone as a GM.
1. Most people do not really play good characters. They kill without a second thought. <---short version.
2. Unless you start murdering people "just because" or some similar level of evil the player should, IMO, get to keep "good" written on his character sheet.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
On the flip side, should homicidal sociopaths be able to cast Protection from Evil/Chaos over and over to maintain a LG alignment regardless of how many babies they eat?
As has been pointed out, animating dead prevents a creature from being raised, also if an undead creature is ever set free or otherwise uncontrolled they will generally go on a murdering rampage.
On the flip side, should homicidal sociopaths be able to cast Protection from Evil/Chaos over and over to maintain a LG alignment regardless of how many babies they eat?
Well duh. Did you see how many Good acts he performed?!
| 9 people marked this as a favorite. |
No, it shouldn't. The entire idea of the mere act of casting a spell, independent of the morality of the actual action, is frankly stupid.
"Alignment descriptors" are idiotic and inconsistent with how the actual descriptors of the game works.
Unless you also rule casting a lot of [Fire] spells slowly turns you into a bonfire, there's no reason for an [Evil] spell to make you Evil.
On the flip side, should homicidal sociopaths be able to cast Protection from Evil/Chaos over and over to maintain a LG alignment regardless of how many babies they eat?
Technically I think if played properly, repeatedly casting such spells would change his outlook on things, so he would gradually become less and less homicidal, less and less sociopathic, and less and less inclined to brunch on infants.
Now, I would rule that if you are casting these spells with an intent to create 'false' alignment, your intent to deceive (presumably to facilitate preparing some toddler tarts) would be a separate chaotic evil act that would outweigh any ameliorating effect the momentary good energies have on your outlook.
Basically though I also believe it is a whole lot easier to accidentally, gradually and unknowingly become evil than it is to become good.
And I my games I don't 'measure' alignment or worry about it too much. Unless a character is clearly and repeatedly choosing behavior that I don't think fit with his professed ethos I don't worry much about it, and when it they do, I let them know well before I force an alignment change...actually I don't think I have ever forced an alignment change, although occasionally a player has said 'yeah, your right my character is more X than Y' and chosen to change on their own.
On the flip side, should homicidal sociopaths be able to cast Protection from Evil/Chaos over and over to maintain a LG alignment regardless of how many babies they eat?Well duh. Did you see how many Good acts he performed?!
but it has brimstone!
while on the other hand things like those aren't "evil" :
Certain spells have the tag "evil" (without quotes) right next to the school of magic.
Three examples are Animate Dead, Blood Transcription and Nightmare.
Please note not all Evil aligns spells are from the school of magic Necromancy, however, it seems the majority are, just not all of them. It has been ruled at our table that the consistent use of such spells will result in an alignment shift.
My question to you is, should it?
Thanks for your time.
I missed the point initially, so I will say this. It should depend on the spell. I also think some spells such as "protection from ..." should not have alignments. If fighting another good party for whatever reason, or if you are evil, and fighting evil creatures casting protection from evil is not a good act.
ok, well it is for game rule reasons, but it is not really good.I understand why necromancy(many spells) is evil because it is based on tropes like many other parts of the game. However the spell itself should do bad things, if it is to be considered evil, such as prevent people from moving on to the afterlife or call them back into their dead bodies even if they only get to be zombies.
What should be evil is creating golems since you are binding elementals against their will to create golems. I have mentioned this before I don't see how it is not evil. If the golem was just from a magical process that did not harm anyone, much like animate dead is, that would be different.
direct from undead subtype notes:
Five Things Almost Everyone Knows About Undead
The following are a few facts that are considered common knowledge among civilized peoples.
Most undead were once living. Knowing details about the phase of existence that preceded a creature's undeath is often invaluable in determining its motives.
Holy water damages undead as though it were acid. Distributed by goodly religious orders the world over, holy water is the only line of defense against undead for many commoners.
Undead are invariably evil, as are the means to create such beings.
Undead are healed by negative energy and harmed by positive energy.
Undead are immune to numerous magical effects, including mind-affecting effects and abilities that affect a creature's physical constitution.
Where do you get that from? Undead are a type, not a subtype. The type says nothing about alignment. Undead are not invariably evil.
Its been that way since Pathfinder had a bestiary.
Ghosts do not change alignment to become evil from becoming a ghost. Bestiary 1.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As has been pointed out, animating dead prevents a creature from being raised, also if an undead creature is ever set free or otherwise uncontrolled they will generally go on a murdering rampage.
Cremation also prevents a creature from being raised or reincarnated.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
As has been pointed out, animating dead prevents a creature from being raised, also if an undead creature is ever set free or otherwise uncontrolled they will generally go on a murdering rampage.Cremation also prevents a creature from being raised or reincarnated.
[Evil] tags for Fireball! After all, it can be used to burninate orphans!
It may be in more than one source, but the 5 things about undead appears on page 5 of the Undead Slayer's Handbook. There, it is prefaced with "The following are a few facts that are considered common knowledge among Golarion's civilized peoples."
One could argue that not all things considered common knowledge are necessarily accurate. There are exceptions to every rule; that's how we get interesting stories.
For what it's worth, I see both sides of this coin as being applicable, depending on your campaign. I can see the spells with the Evil descriptor as being inherently corrupting, just by invoking their energies. I like the flavor of that. But I could also see where the same spells could be used for good ends, which would potentially offset the nature of the spell.
It may be in more than one source, but the 5 things about undead appears on page 5 of the Undead Slayer's Handbook. There, it is prefaced with "The following are a few facts that are considered common knowledge among Golarion's civilized peoples."
One could argue that not all things considered common knowledge are necessarily accurate. There are exceptions to every rule; that's how we get interesting stories.
For what it's worth, I see both sides of this coin as being applicable, depending on your campaign. I can see the spells with the Evil descriptor as being inherently corrupting, just by invoking their energies. I like the flavor of that. But I could also see where the same spells could be used for good ends, which would potentially offset the nature of the spell.
I like this idea, but I also like the idea of doing the wrong thing for the right reason and you still being slowly corrupted. I just starting watching an anime called "Death Note", and after the first episode, I am sure that is what is happening.
As I've said elsewhere, the [Evil] descriptor is really just code for "we don't think players should be doing this." Developer intent BADWRONGFUN right there.
This gets into the canard that is alignment, as well. Why do we have Law vs Chaos when we could have Freedom vs Oppression?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As I've said elsewhere, the [Evil] descriptor is really just code for "we don't think players should be doing this." Developer intent BADWRONGFUN right there.
This gets into the canard that is alignment, as well. Why do we have Law vs Chaos when we could have Freedom vs Oppression?
That is not the case. They don't really care, but most games do assume heroic actions, and most fantasy stories have certain things that the good guys don't do so it was coded into the game. Freedom and Oppression don't sound like alignments. Personally I don't think agree with the way the alignments were done, but I do understand why.
Certain things should be evil, and I understand certain deities taking powers away if you go against their system, but I don't think players need alignment. I would just prefer if certain actions were listed as evil, along with certain spells.
Doing something evil may not make the person evil, but the act could still be evil.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I like this idea, but I also like the idea of doing the wrong thing for the right reason and you still being slowly corrupted. I just starting watching an anime called "Death Note", and after the first episode, I am sure that is what is happening.It may be in more than one source, but the 5 things about undead appears on page 5 of the Undead Slayer's Handbook. There, it is prefaced with "The following are a few facts that are considered common knowledge among Golarion's civilized peoples."
One could argue that not all things considered common knowledge are necessarily accurate. There are exceptions to every rule; that's how we get interesting stories.
For what it's worth, I see both sides of this coin as being applicable, depending on your campaign. I can see the spells with the Evil descriptor as being inherently corrupting, just by invoking their energies. I like the flavor of that. But I could also see where the same spells could be used for good ends, which would potentially offset the nature of the spell.
I agree. However, the same should be true for all alignments. Doing good things should steadily make you come to value goodness. Doing chaotic things should make you value freedom. Doing lawful things should make you value lawfulness. Evil should not get to be "special". I would love a word that gave the same connotations of slow, seductive, changes in behavior for good that the word corruption gives for evil.
So yes, casting [Evil] spells can make you more Evil (even if some of them are really silly), but by the same token casting spells of any alignment should make you more of that alignment. Which means just cast a few Protections from Evil and say a few Hail Marys after you use Infernal Healing or Animate Dead.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
The existence or real, actual gods in Golarion creates a morality system that actually is Objective. The entire study of Ethics and moral systems doesn't exist in Golarion. It's a moot point. Nothing is actually subjective because of the known existence of Gods.
The gods are the moral authority. They decide what is good and evil. If you aren't sure yourself there's a whole array of spells designed to directly ask them, and lots of people around who can communicate with them directly. Their opinions aren't speculation. They are very firmly established and enforced. They really do exist, and they really don't like it when you do that thing.
So when the gods decide something is inherently Evil, it's evil. Period, end of story. Casting that spell is an evil act because they say so, and you will be judged for it when you die.
It doesn't matter if the spell itself doesn't seem inherently wrong to you, or if you used it to defeat a terrible evil in the world. The gods say it's bad, m'kay?
Its an unfortunate reality of the Alignment system. It makes no sense and causes all kinds of arguments around the table, but within the reality of the game itself, the characters who exist in that world are completely aware that some things are evil for no reason other than some God doesn't like it (or does like it, in the case of evil gods).
Its basically the action-equivilant of guilt by association.
So the answer is, some things are Evil or Good because the gods are fickle. That's it.
If you want things to be different in your game, you need to take each Evil or Good spell on a case by case basis and house rule them. (I recommend that. It makes the game more interesting if good and evil aren't so arbitrary)
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The existence or real, actual gods in Golarion creates a morality system that actually is Objective. The entire study of Ethics and moral systems doesn't exist in Golarion. It's a moot point. Nothing is actually subjective because of the known existence of Gods.
The gods are the moral authority. They decide what is good and evil. If you aren't sure yourself there's a whole array of spells designed to directly ask them, and lots of people around who can communicate with them directly. Their opinions aren't speculation. They are very firmly established and enforced. They really do exist, and they really don't like it when you do that thing.
So when the gods decide something is inherently Evil, it's evil. Period, end of story. Casting that spell is an evil act because they say so, and you will be judged for it when you die.
It doesn't matter if the spell itself doesn't seem inherently wrong to you, or if you used it to defeat a terrible evil in the world. The gods say it's bad, m'kay?
Its an unfortunate reality of the Alignment system. It makes no sense and causes all kinds of arguments around the table, but within the reality of the game itself, the characters who exist in that world are completely aware that some things are evil for no reason other than some God doesn't like it (or does like it, in the case of evil gods).
Its basically the action-equivilant of guilt by association.
So the answer is, some things are Evil or Good because the gods are fickle. That's it.
If you want things to be different in your game, you need to take each Evil or Good spell on a case by case basis and house rule them. (I recommend that. It makes the game more interesting if good and evil aren't so arbitrary)
Gonna disagree here. While yes alignment is objective, the Gods don't get to pick and choose it. Alignment itself decides those things. A good god can't sanction something Evil as a Good action, because it will still be Evil, since it goes against the objective Good alignment.
[Evil] tags for Fireball! After all, it can be used to burninate orphans!As has been pointed out, animating dead prevents a creature from being raised, also if an undead creature is ever set free or otherwise uncontrolled they will generally go on a murdering rampage.Cremation also prevents a creature from being raised or reincarnated.
And you know... being burned to death is a fairly horrible way to go.
I'm not saying other spells are also horrible (or you know, being dismembered with a greatsword), but fireballs are flashy about it. And indiscriminate (this classic 'stone call in a crowded market' scenario).
I mean... how many of you have not only shot a fireball while allies were in the radius, but even accidentally killed them because you 'thought they could handle it'? That sounds.... well, lets not judge alignment based off of murderhobo logic. Otherwise most of us would be CE.
I just watched a few more Deathnote episodes. I wont give any specific spoilers, but it seems my guess was right. :)
I just watched a few more Deathnote episodes. I wont give any specific spoilers, but it seems my guess was right. :)
I'm not sure it counts as spoilers anymore, I think you'd be safe to go into more detail if you wanted.