|
That is an interesting point. The rules say that good and evil spells follow the same rules.
So if using infernal healing is a minor Evil act regardless of how much good it does, then logically murdering someone with Holy Word is still a Good action.
Murder is a stronger evil action than casting an aligned spell is aligned(good in this case). Thus, you still net an evil action. Though, one not as strong as murder would normally be. Depending on the GMs decision though, torture is probably not as strong as murder, but stronger than stealing, so casting celestial healing to keep a torture victim alive might actually net a neutral act.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
By that method of thinking, stealing and murdering would be the same evil since they aren't explicitly laid out.
For spells and abhorrent acts you have evil spells, then evil spells that summon evil outsiders. That's where the abhorrent part comes in.
Again, CU is in no way the same. You are not "utilizing" an evil substance in the same way that infernal healing does, CU isn't powered by undead. You cast it on undead and then what you have them do is where, if any, Alignemnt effects would come into play.
By that same logic disrupt undead should have a [Good] tag. It doesn't.
There was a reason I quoted the relevant text. It is the one that said what matters is how you use it for extra alignment changes.
Again, you are saying summoning an evil outsider is an abhorrent act. Not the book. But, if summoning an evil outsider was an abhorrent act(say, also an evil action) then casting the evil spell(summon mon to summon evil outsider) is an evil act on par with any other evil spell casting... and also the evil outsider appearing is an evil act. That makes two evil acts. It doesn't change how evil casting an evil spell is. But, the more mundane example would be "fireball isn't evil but you can do evil with it by exploding orphanages." Then "If fireball was a good spell, you can do evil with it by exploding orphanages and those two acts are added together to decide how aligned the act was."CU is the same exact thing as utilizing evil blood. As it is both "using evil". It isn't that you are using something evil... it is what you do with it. So, using evil blood isn't evil but if you use evil blood to do evil it is evil... just as commanding undead isn't evil but if you command the undead to do evil it is evil.
By no logic stated would disrupt undead have a good tag. Just as not every spell that utilizes negative energy is an evil spell.
|
|
Murder is a stronger evil action than casting an aligned spell is aligned(good in this case).That is an interesting point. The rules say that good and evil spells follow the same rules.
So if using infernal healing is a minor Evil act regardless of how much good it does, then logically murdering someone with Holy Word is still a Good action.
Horror Adventures disagree with you. It states that regardless of what purpose you use for the spell, casting it too much shifts your alignment.
For that to be the case, the spell itself has to outweigh whatever actions you take with the spell.
Hear my exasperated sigh.
One cast of holy word will not overcome murder. This is NOT in horror adventures. In fact, it says that, for example, sacrificing someone would immediately turn you evil. It requires a good character about 5 casts of an evil spell to become evil... thus casting a good spell would be about 1/5th as good as murdering someone is evil.
But, you can overcome a murder by casting celestial healing 5 times. The amount matters.(final numbers depending on GM arbitration)
|
That's just the thing, they wouldn't know how much aligned magic it takes. Knowing how many rounds it lasts is vastly different than how much it would affect your Alignemnt due to all the factors at play.Determining that experimentally seems like something a wizard's guild would be into. Would also help inform lawmaking bodies of whether access to it should be controlled.Soemthing that someone would try somewhere? Maybe? But it would, if not fail, produce no useful results other than "hey, this s#+$ is evil and doing this would make us eviler."
With each person's mindset, and circumstances, and their alignment, it would be borderline impossible to accurately measure "how much" it takes from spells to shift your personality to a specified amount. In game I would view the personality change as gradual anyway rather than 1-2-3-Ding! anyway.
That and finding people who would agree to do this in the first place would be a thing in and of itself.
It would produce some very useful results. Using alignment detection spells, we can find the point where people's alignment changes.
By repeatedly performing the experiment, I could determine something like "It takes a mean of 5 Good spellcastings to switch from Neutral to Good, with a Standard Deviation of 0.7 spellcastings. By contrast, it only took 3 Evil spellcastings to switch from Good to neutral with a standard deviation of 0.3 spellcasts. So then I can be 99.9% confident if I cast 8 Good spells for every 2 Evil spells, then I will remain Good".
No, not really. You're assuming this all occurs in a vaccuum, and that the alignment change would be just a letter difference and not drastically change their personality. Their thoughts might align a certain way so now it's harder to switch, or easier. And that's if they even want to go through with it afterwards. You're giving the lack of of control in the test too much credit.
This is very useful info for someone who wants to safely use evil spells.
No such way.
|
|
Don't most contests have no alignments due to their low or lack of intelligence? And in the case of golems that's not really viable either due to the elemental spirit powering them.If using the spell, regardless of circumstances, has an effect, you could just load up a construct with wands to use as your blank state. This also allows for the effects to be documented while still only requiring one person interested in doing so.That's just the thing, they wouldn't know how much aligned magic it takes. Knowing how many rounds it lasts is vastly different than how much it would affect your Alignemnt due to all the factors at play.Determining that experimentally seems like something a wizard's guild would be into. Would also help inform lawmaking bodies of whether access to it should be controlled.Soemthing that someone would try somewhere? Maybe? But it would, if not fail, produce no useful results other than "hey, this s#!@ is evil and doing this would make us eviler."
With each person's mindset, and circumstances, and their alignment, it would be borderline impossible to accurately measure "how much" it takes from spells to shift your personality to a specified amount. In game I would view the personality change as gradual anyway rather than 1-2-3-Ding! anyway.
That and finding people who would agree to do this in the first place would be a thing in and of itself.
Technically, being mindless makes them neutral, not unaligned, because they make no explicit good/evil/lawful/chaotic act. This is exactly why I recommend using them. They are at the baseline, meaning the influence of using the spells can be measured. The construct may remain neutral, at which point it can be inferred that, at least from a wand, there is no objective alignment influence.
You are right about the golems and their spirits complicating matters, but other construct types exist.
Oooo, interesting...
|
|
Murder is a stronger evil action than casting an aligned spell is aligned(good in this case). Thus, you still net an evil action. Though, one not as strong as murder would normally be. Depending on the GMs decision though, torture is probably not as strong as murder, but stronger than stealing, so casting celestial healing to keep a torture victim alive might actually net a neutral act.That is an interesting point. The rules say that good and evil spells follow the same rules.
So if using infernal healing is a minor Evil act regardless of how much good it does, then logically murdering someone with Holy Word is still a Good action.
*nods*
|
|
No, not really. You're assuming this all occurs in a vaccuum, and that the alignment change would be just a letter difference and not drastically change their personality. Their thoughts might align a certain way so now it's harder to switch, or easier. And that's if they even want to go through with it afterwards. You're giving the lack of of control in the test too much credit....That's just the thing, they wouldn't know how much aligned magic it takes. Knowing how many rounds it lasts is vastly different than how much it would affect your Alignemnt due to all the factors at play.Determining that experimentally seems like something a wizard's guild would be into. Would also help inform lawmaking bodies of whether access to it should be controlled.Soemthing that someone would try somewhere? Maybe? But it would, if not fail, produce no useful results other than "hey, this s#+$ is evil and doing this would make us eviler."
With each person's mindset, and circumstances, and their alignment, it would be borderline impossible to accurately measure "how much" it takes from spells to shift your personality to a specified amount. In game I would view the personality change as gradual anyway rather than 1-2-3-Ding! anyway.
That and finding people who would agree to do this in the first place would be a thing in and of itself.
It would produce some very useful results. Using alignment detection spells, we can find the point where people's alignment changes.
By repeatedly performing the experiment, I could determine something like "It takes a mean of 5 Good spellcastings to switch from Neutral to Good, with a Standard Deviation of 0.7 spellcastings. By contrast, it only took 3 Evil spellcastings to switch from Good to neutral with a standard deviation of 0.3 spellcasts. So then I can be 99.9% confident if I cast 8 Good spells for every 2 Evil spells, then I will remain Good".
Did you forget that people can literally ask the gods about this question? Experimentation is great, and should work... but several familiars have Commune and then you include divine casters into the mix...
|
|
The exact number doesn't matter. Protection From Evil/Good/Law/Chaos are 1st level spell with no cost associated. If a 5th wizard has a free week he can cast it 50+ times.
All he really needs to know is an order of magnitude. IE If casting 10 good spells is generally enough, then he can cast 50 and be pretty sure his alignment has shifted(verified by someone with detect good ideally).
Incidently, this is how a lot of real life science is done. Data has noise and uncertainty, but you can compensate through probabilistic analysis.
Not when there is this many variables, and no controls.
You're assuming the caster in question would be comepletely detached and conservative with how they went about changing their personality and mindset, when that's contradictory in and of itself right there.
Obviously a full study would have to be more rigorous. The goal here is to minimize change to personality in mindset.
You could view evil spells like addictive drug use. That also alters a persons mindset, but thanks to careful research and proper prescriptions millions of people are able to take the drugs without being addicted.
The way to minimize change would be to not cast the spell. Drugs give you an up and then fades, whereas casting an aligned spell builda and builds.
|
|
Thats no different than say, drug addiction. Yet we have plenty of very useful studies on how frequently people can take drugs without suffering the addictive effects and what measures can be taken to prevent addiction.
Drugs, highs, addiction and changing Alignemnt/personality are very much not the same thing.
|
|
Where do the rules say the alignment effects build up rather than cancels out with each other?The way to minimize change would be to not cast the spell. Drugs give you an up and then fades, whereas casting an aligned spell builda and builds.The exact number doesn't matter. Protection From Evil/Good/Law/Chaos are 1st level spell with no cost associated. If a 5th wizard has a free week he can cast it 50+ times.
All he really needs to know is an order of magnitude. IE If casting 10 good spells is generally enough, then he can cast 50 and be pretty sure his alignment has shifted(verified by someone with detect good ideally).
Incidently, this is how a lot of real life science is done. Data has noise and uncertainty, but you can compensate through probabilistic analysis.
Not when there is this many variables, and no controls.
You're assuming the caster in question would be comepletely detached and conservative with how they went about changing their personality and mindset, when that's contradictory in and of itself right there.
Obviously a full study would have to be more rigorous. The goal here is to minimize change to personality in mindset.
You could view evil spells like addictive drug use. That also alters a persons mindset, but thanks to careful research and proper prescriptions millions of people are able to take the drugs without being addicted.
Where does it specifically say it does one over the other?
|
In PFS being evil means you get kicked from the game, and they definitely do not want GMs having to decide whether to kick a player from the table for casting an evil spell too often.
True, so why shouldn't consistently using Evil powers be an issue? The Character and Player are making a choice to empower and use Evil, it's not being forced on them or part of a "gotcha" scenario twist. Deciding to use Evil should have meaningful consequences, and doing so often should be risky and/or costly in more than just flavor that is not in any way supported by the mechanics.
Actually by PFS rules it would just make you spend more coins or prestige on Indulgences.
Which honestly sounds like a perfectly reasonable thing. As it stands, the only time I've really seen the forced Atonement rules used is for Divine Casters, who already get hit much harder anyway.
|
|
Where do the rules say the alignment effects build up rather than cancels out with each other?The way to minimize change would be to not cast the spell. Drugs give you an up and then fades, whereas casting an aligned spell builda and builds.The exact number doesn't matter. Protection From Evil/Good/Law/Chaos are 1st level spell with no cost associated. If a 5th wizard has a free week he can cast it 50+ times.
All he really needs to know is an order of magnitude. IE If casting 10 good spells is generally enough, then he can cast 50 and be pretty sure his alignment has shifted(verified by someone with detect good ideally).
Incidently, this is how a lot of real life science is done. Data has noise and uncertainty, but you can compensate through probabilistic analysis.
Not when there is this many variables, and no controls.
You're assuming the caster in question would be comepletely detached and conservative with how they went about changing their personality and mindset, when that's contradictory in and of itself right there.
Obviously a full study would have to be more rigorous. The goal here is to minimize change to personality in mindset.
You could view evil spells like addictive drug use. That also alters a persons mindset, but thanks to careful research and proper prescriptions millions of people are able to take the drugs without being addicted.
Actually, casting aligned spells does fade over time, if you don't cast enough to change your alignment.
" The greater the amount of time between castings, the less likely alignment will change. "
Thus, with time, you could cast 10 evil spells in a row(as in cast no other spells with an alignment over the length of period required) without changing your alignment. If you space the casts out enough.
|
|
Did you forget that people can literally ask the gods about this question? Experimentation is great, and should work... but several familiars have Commune and then you include divine casters into the mix...Did you forget that Gods aren't omniscient?
No, but are you suggesting they can't tell how much evil an evil spell does if an evil spell does evil?
|
|
Did you forget that people can literally ask the gods about this question? Experimentation is great, and should work... but several familiars have Commune and then you include divine casters into the mix...Did you forget that Gods aren't omniscient?
But they are not idiots, either, and in many ways are the universe's experts on the subject matter.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
By that method of thinking, stealing and murdering would be the same evil since they aren't explicitly laid out.
For spells and abhorrent acts you have evil spells, then evil spells that summon evil outsiders. That's where the abhorrent part comes in.
Again, CU is in no way the same. You are not "utilizing" an evil substance in the same way that infernal healing does, CU isn't powered by undead. You cast it on undead and then what you have them do is where, if any, Alignemnt effects would come into play.
By that same logic disrupt undead should have a [Good] tag. It doesn't.
There was a reason I quoted the relevant text. It is the one that said what matters is how you use it for extra alignment changes.
Again, you are saying summoning an evil outsider is an abhorrent act. Not the book. But, if summoning an evil outsider was an abhorrent act(say, also an evil action) then casting the evil spell(summon mon to summon evil outsider) is an evil act on par with any other evil spell casting... and also the evil outsider appearing is an evil act. That makes two evil acts. It doesn't change how evil casting an evil spell is. But, the more mundane example would be "fireball isn't evil but you can do evil with it by exploding orphanages." Then "If fireball was a good spell, you can do evil with it by exploding orphanages and those two acts are added together to decide how aligned the act was."CU is the same exact thing as utilizing evil blood. As it is both "using evil". It isn't that you are using something evil... it is what you do with it. So, using evil blood isn't evil but if you use evil blood to do evil it is evil... just as commanding undead isn't evil but if you command the undead to do evil it is evil.
By no logic stated would disrupt undead have a good tag. Just as not every spell that utilizes negative energy is an evil spell.
Yes I am saying what an "Abhorrent Act" is because the book doesn't spell it out.
Moreso than anything else in this thread I can't wrap my head around how you see CU and IH are the same when they are nothing alike. Absolutely nothing. Control Undead lets you take command of Undead, it's not powered by Evil, it's a spell used against Evil things. Infernal Healing is powered by Liquid Evil. They're are completely different things.
|
|
No, but are you suggesting they can't tell how much evil an evil spell does if an evil spell does evil?Did you forget that people can literally ask the gods about this question? Experimentation is great, and should work... but several familiars have Commune and then you include divine casters into the mix...Did you forget that Gods aren't omniscient?
They would know the net amount of evil from each spell. But then there's the caster. And then there's why the caster is using it. And plenty of other circumstances.
Too many variables.
Add to that the Gods would have agendas and would obviously give an answer that suits them and their followers best. Obviously without lying by the Good aligned deities. Maybe.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
But they are not idiots, either, and in many ways are the universe's experts on the subject matter.Did you forget that people can literally ask the gods about this question? Experimentation is great, and should work... but several familiars have Commune and then you include divine casters into the mix...Did you forget that Gods aren't omniscient?
I'm beginning to suspect that this is how Nethys ascended...
|
|
By that method of thinking, stealing and murdering would be the same evil since they aren't explicitly laid out.
For spells and abhorrent acts you have evil spells, then evil spells that summon evil outsiders. That's where the abhorrent part comes in.
Again, CU is in no way the same. You are not "utilizing" an evil substance in the same way that infernal healing does, CU isn't powered by undead. You cast it on undead and then what you have them do is where, if any, Alignemnt effects would come into play.
By that same logic disrupt undead should have a [Good] tag. It doesn't.
There was a reason I quoted the relevant text. It is the one that said what matters is how you use it for extra alignment changes.
Again, you are saying summoning an evil outsider is an abhorrent act. Not the book. But, if summoning an evil outsider was an abhorrent act(say, also an evil action) then casting the evil spell(summon mon to summon evil outsider) is an evil act on par with any other evil spell casting... and also the evil outsider appearing is an evil act. That makes two evil acts. It doesn't change how evil casting an evil spell is. But, the more mundane example would be "fireball isn't evil but you can do evil with it by exploding orphanages." Then "If fireball was a good spell, you can do evil with it by exploding orphanages and those two acts are added together to decide how aligned the act was."CU is the same exact thing as utilizing evil blood. As it is both "using evil". It isn't that you are using something evil... it is what you do with it. So, using evil blood isn't evil but if you use evil blood to do evil it is evil... just as commanding undead isn't evil but if you command the undead to do evil it is evil.
By no logic stated would disrupt undead have a good tag. Just as not every spell that utilizes negative energy is an evil spell.
Yes I am saying what an "Abhorrent Act" is because the book doesn't spell it out.
Moreso than anything else in...
I didn't say CU and IF are the same. I said finding a use for undead and evil blood are the same. In that it matters what you do with them.
|
|
No, but are you suggesting they can't tell how much evil an evil spell does if an evil spell does evil?Did you forget that people can literally ask the gods about this question? Experimentation is great, and should work... but several familiars have Commune and then you include divine casters into the mix...Did you forget that Gods aren't omniscient?They would know the net amount of evil from each spell. But then there's the caster. And then there's why the caster is using it. And plenty of other circumstances.
Too many variables.
Add to that the Gods would have agendas and would obviously give an answer that suits them and their followers best. Obviously without lying by the Good aligned deities. Maybe.
You may not know "how many casts will I need to turn evil" but you can know "in a vaccum, a purely good person needs x casts to turn evil". And that is enough to go by.
|
|
You may not know "how many casts will I need to turn evil" but you can know "in a vaccum, a purely good person needs x casts to turn evil". And that is enough to go by.No, but are you suggesting they can't tell how much evil an evil spell does if an evil spell does evil?Did you forget that people can literally ask the gods about this question? Experimentation is great, and should work... but several familiars have Commune and then you include divine casters into the mix...Did you forget that Gods aren't omniscient?They would know the net amount of evil from each spell. But then there's the caster. And then there's why the caster is using it. And plenty of other circumstances.
Too many variables.
Add to that the Gods would have agendas and would obviously give an answer that suits them and their followers best. Obviously without lying by the Good aligned deities. Maybe.
Possible, but again, how would the deity come across this knowledge?
|
|
And that is something that we disagree on.
My statement is from the lack of text saying that it is definitely evil and yours is from "this is how I would declare it at my table". As I said before, it is fine to disagree here since there is no definitive answer. Neither mine, since they never say it isn't nor yours because they never say it is.
Of course, if it is true that using blood from an aligned outsider is an aligned act... then IF and CH would both more quickly change your alignment than any other aligned spell that doesn't also include an aligned action.
|
|
Possible, but again, how would the deity come across this knowledge?You may not know "how many casts will I need to turn evil" but you can know "in a vaccum, a purely good person needs x casts to turn evil". And that is enough to go by.No, but are you suggesting they can't tell how much evil an evil spell does if an evil spell does evil?Did you forget that people can literally ask the gods about this question? Experimentation is great, and should work... but several familiars have Commune and then you include divine casters into the mix...Did you forget that Gods aren't omniscient?They would know the net amount of evil from each spell. But then there's the caster. And then there's why the caster is using it. And plenty of other circumstances.
Too many variables.
Add to that the Gods would have agendas and would obviously give an answer that suits them and their followers best. Obviously without lying by the Good aligned deities. Maybe.
Any number of ways? Any rule of the universe should be discoverable. And any god dedicated to good, evil, magic or universal laws in general could have the want to figure it out.
|
|
And that is something that we disagree on.My statement is from the lack of text saying that it is definitely evil and yours is from "this is how I would declare it at my table". As I said before, it is fine to disagree here since there is no definitive answer. Neither mine, since they never say it isn't nor yours because they never say it is.
Of course, if it is true that using blood from an aligned outsider is an aligned act... then IF and CH would both more quickly change your alignment than any other aligned spell that doesn't also include an aligned action.
But there's not even the lack of text regarding them. One of them is the blood of an evil outsider, a being of pure evil. The other is water cursed by an evil spell.
|
|
Any number of ways? Any rule of the universe should be discoverable. And any god dedicated to good, evil, magic or universal laws in general could have the want to figure it out.Possible, but again, how would the deity come across this knowledge?You may not know "how many casts will I need to turn evil" but you can know "in a vaccum, a purely good person needs x casts to turn evil". And that is enough to go by.No, but are you suggesting they can't tell how much evil an evil spell does if an evil spell does evil?Did you forget that people can literally ask the gods about this question? Experimentation is great, and should work... but several familiars have Commune and then you include divine casters into the mix...Did you forget that Gods aren't omniscient?They would know the net amount of evil from each spell. But then there's the caster. And then there's why the caster is using it. And plenty of other circumstances.
Too many variables.
Add to that the Gods would have agendas and would obviously give an answer that suits them and their followers best. Obviously without lying by the Good aligned deities. Maybe.
Should be. Is? Maybe. Already done? Maybe. Just because you've created an theoretical experiment doesn't mean it's been carried out, or was successful if it was.
|
|
But there's not even the lack of text regarding them. One of them is the blood of an evil outsider, a being of pure evil. The other is water cursed by an evil spell.And that is something that we disagree on.My statement is from the lack of text saying that it is definitely evil and yours is from "this is how I would declare it at my table". As I said before, it is fine to disagree here since there is no definitive answer. Neither mine, since they never say it isn't nor yours because they never say it is.
Of course, if it is true that using blood from an aligned outsider is an aligned act... then IF and CH would both more quickly change your alignment than any other aligned spell that doesn't also include an aligned action.
There is a lack of text. Blood of an evil outsider... is it actually evil even when it away from the creature? Is it itself inherently evil? And unholy water is the opposite of holy water, and holy water is just water with positive energy in it. Thus, unholy water is only negative energy in water. Thus, holy water is not good aligned nor is unholy water evil aligned. Only positive and negative aligned, respectively.
As we have established, utilizing positive or negative energy is not inherently morally aligned.
|
|
Any number of ways? Any rule of the universe should be discoverable. And any god dedicated to good, evil, magic or universal laws in general could have the want to figure it out.Should be. Is? Maybe. Already done? Maybe. Just because you've created an theoretical experiment doesn't mean it's been carried out, or was successful if it was.
My point is it is highly likely that something which can affect alignments so strongly has been investigated by the gods. At the very least, it should be entirely possible to do so for the gods... So what is your problem with that? I'm not saying that it is something in text.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
My point is it is highly likely that something which can affect alignments so strongly has been investigated by the gods. At the very least, it should be entirely possible to do so for the gods... So what is your problem with that? I'm not saying that it is something in text.Any number of ways? Any rule of the universe should be discoverable. And any god dedicated to good, evil, magic or universal laws in general could have the want to figure it out.Should be. Is? Maybe. Already done? Maybe. Just because you've created an theoretical experiment doesn't mean it's been carried out, or was successful if it was.
Asmodeus, Nethys, and Pharasma at the very least should all know the answer just as part of their portfolios. Actually for that matter literally every Usher and Archdevil should be able to answer it as part of their day to day job function...
|
|
But there's not even the lack of text regarding them. One of them is the blood of an evil outsider, a being of pure evil. The other is water cursed by an evil spell.And that is something that we disagree on.My statement is from the lack of text saying that it is definitely evil and yours is from "this is how I would declare it at my table". As I said before, it is fine to disagree here since there is no definitive answer. Neither mine, since they never say it isn't nor yours because they never say it is.
Of course, if it is true that using blood from an aligned outsider is an aligned act... then IF and CH would both more quickly change your alignment than any other aligned spell that doesn't also include an aligned action.
There is a lack of text. Blood of an evil creature... is it actually evil even when it away from the creature? Is it itself inherently evil? And unholy water is the opposite of holy water, and holy water is just water with positive energy in it. Thus, unholy water is only negative energy in water. Thus, holy water is not good aligned nor is unholy water evil aligned. Only positive and negative aligned, respectively.
As we have established, utilizing positive or negative energy is not inherently morally aligned.
An evil creature? No. An Evil Outsider, a being made out Evil? Yes.
Unholy Water is water charged with negative energy by an evil spell. Note that unlike normal negative energy it doesn't hurt the living, just good aligned outsiders. The same with holy water hurting undead AND evil outsiders , something positive energy doesn't do by itself.
|
|
My point is it is highly likely that something which can affect alignments so strongly has been investigated by the gods. At the very least, it should be entirely possible to do so for the gods... So what is your problem with that? I'm not saying that it is something in text.Any number of ways? Any rule of the universe should be discoverable. And any god dedicated to good, evil, magic or universal laws in general could have the want to figure it out.Should be. Is? Maybe. Already done? Maybe. Just because you've created an theoretical experiment doesn't mean it's been carried out, or was successful if it was.
I don't have a problem with them or others investigating the nature of alignment.
It's the "one universal answer to how many aligned spells I need to use" that I have a problem with, which is what this conversation was kinda based around.
|
|
Asmodeus, Nethys, and Pharasma at the very least should all know the answer just as part of their portfolios. Actually for that matter literally every Usher and Archdevil should be able to answer it as part of their day to day job function...My point is it is highly likely that something which can affect alignments so strongly has been investigated by the gods. At the very least, it should be entirely possible to do so for the gods... So what is your problem with that? I'm not saying that it is something in text.Any number of ways? Any rule of the universe should be discoverable. And any god dedicated to good, evil, magic or universal laws in general could have the want to figure it out.Should be. Is? Maybe. Already done? Maybe. Just because you've created an theoretical experiment doesn't mean it's been carried out, or was successful if it was.
Those are also the 3 that would be very likely to screw with you as well.
You contact your deity—or agents thereof—and ask questions that can be answered by a simple yes or no. (A cleric of no particular deity contacts a philosophically allied deity.) You are allowed one such question per caster level. The answers given are correct within the limits of the entity's knowledge. "Unclear" is a legitimate answer, because powerful beings of the Outer Planes are not necessarily omniscient. In cases where a one-word answer would be misleading or contrary to the deity's interests, a short phrase (five words or less) may be given as an answer instead.
The spell, at best, provides information to aid character decisions. The entities contacted structure their answers to further their own purposes. If you lag, discuss the answers, or go off to do anything else, the spell ends.
|
|
But there's not even the lack of text regarding them. One of them is the blood of an evil outsider, a being of pure evil. The other is water cursed by an evil spell.And that is something that we disagree on.My statement is from the lack of text saying that it is definitely evil and yours is from "this is how I would declare it at my table". As I said before, it is fine to disagree here since there is no definitive answer. Neither mine, since they never say it isn't nor yours because they never say it is.
Of course, if it is true that using blood from an aligned outsider is an aligned act... then IF and CH would both more quickly change your alignment than any other aligned spell that doesn't also include an aligned action.
There is a lack of text. Blood of an evil creature... is it actually evil even when it away from the creature? Is it itself inherently evil? And unholy water is the opposite of holy water, and holy water is just water with positive energy in it. Thus, unholy water is only negative energy in water. Thus, holy water is not good aligned nor is unholy water evil aligned. Only positive and negative aligned, respectively.
As we have established, utilizing positive or negative energy is not inherently morally aligned.
An evil creature? No. An Evil Outsider, a being made out Evil? Yes.
Unholy Water is water charged with negative energy by an evil spell. Note that unlike normal negative energy it doesn't hurt the living, just good aligned outsiders. The same with holy water hurting undead AND evil outsiders , something positive energy doesn't do by itself.
And did anything in your spiel turn positive energy into a good aligned energy or negative energy into evil aligned energy? It did not. Though they are crafted with an aligned spell it does not make them aligned. They do not even do good or evil damage. We know positive energy can be used to heal OR harm(this is how channel energy works, it doesn't do both) and we know positive energy can be tuned to damage outsiders(Aligned Channel). But neither of those effects turn it into Good energy. It simply isn't aligned.
|
|
My point is it is highly likely that something which can affect alignments so strongly has been investigated by the gods. At the very least, it should be entirely possible to do so for the gods... So what is your problem with that? I'm not saying that it is something in text.Any number of ways? Any rule of the universe should be discoverable. And any god dedicated to good, evil, magic or universal laws in general could have the want to figure it out.Should be. Is? Maybe. Already done? Maybe. Just because you've created an theoretical experiment doesn't mean it's been carried out, or was successful if it was.I don't have a problem with them or others investigating the nature of alignment.
It's the "one universal answer to how many aligned spells I need to use" that I have a problem with, which is what this conversation was kinda based around.
That should be discoverable too, since the Gods are known to whisper in your ear when you get close to changing alignment or falling(this is a suggesting to GMs on how to handle it). If they know how much evil an evil spell does and how evil you are... they can add the two together to know the answer.
But, I'm just saying, they should either know or be able to discover how much evil an evil spell does. Knowing that makes the whole system answerable.
Asmodeus, Nethys, and Pharasma at the very least should all know the answer just as part of their portfolios. Actually for that matter literally every Usher and Archdevil should be able to answer it as part of their day to day job function...My point is it is highly likely that something which can affect alignments so strongly has been investigated by the gods. At the very least, it should be entirely possible to do so for the gods... So what is your problem with that? I'm not saying that it is something in text.Any number of ways? Any rule of the universe should be discoverable. And any god dedicated to good, evil, magic or universal laws in general could have the want to figure it out.Should be. Is? Maybe. Already done? Maybe. Just because you've created an theoretical experiment doesn't mean it's been carried out, or was successful if it was.Those are also the 3 that would be very likely to screw with you as well.
You contact your deity—or agents thereof—and ask questions that can be answered by a simple yes or no. (A cleric of no particular deity contacts a philosophically allied deity.) You are allowed one such question per caster level. The answers given are correct within the limits of the entity's knowledge. "Unclear" is a legitimate answer, because powerful beings of the Outer Planes are not necessarily omniscient. In cases where a one-word answer would be misleading or contrary to the deity's interests, a short phrase (five words or less) may be given as an answer instead.
The spell, at best, provides information to aid character decisions. The entities contacted structure their answers to further their own purposes. If you lag, discuss the answers, or go off to do anything else, the spell ends.
I can see Asmodeus and the Archdevils doing so, but Nethys, Pharasma, and the Ushers I can't see having a reason to. One is the definition of magically neutral and the others are judges with no claim to the soul one way or the other. Considering the later would be the ones to make the final call on you they would even be able to tell you as an individual howe it will work in your case.
|
|
And did anything in your spiel turn positive energy into a good aligned energy or negative energy into evil aligned energy? It did not. Though they are crafted with an aligned spell it does not make them aligned. They do not even do good or evil damage. We know positive energy can be used to...But there's not even the lack of text regarding them. One of them is the blood of an evil outsider, a being of pure evil. The other is water cursed by an evil spell.And that is something that we disagree on.My statement is from the lack of text saying that it is definitely evil and yours is from "this is how I would declare it at my table". As I said before, it is fine to disagree here since there is no definitive answer. Neither mine, since they never say it isn't nor yours because they never say it is.
Of course, if it is true that using blood from an aligned outsider is an aligned act... then IF and CH would both more quickly change your alignment than any other aligned spell that doesn't also include an aligned action.
There is a lack of text. Blood of an evil creature... is it actually evil even when it away from the creature? Is it itself inherently evil? And unholy water is the opposite of holy water, and holy water is just water with positive energy in it. Thus, unholy water is only negative energy in water. Thus, holy water is not good aligned nor is unholy water evil aligned. Only positive and negative aligned, respectively.
As we have established, utilizing positive or negative energy is not inherently morally aligned.
An evil creature? No. An Evil Outsider, a being made out Evil? Yes.
Unholy Water is water charged with negative energy by an evil spell. Note that unlike normal negative energy it doesn't hurt the living, just good aligned outsiders. The same with holy water hurting undead AND evil outsiders , something positive energy doesn't do by itself.
Um, yes they are.
Holy water hurts undead (something positive energy does) and evil outsiders (something positive energy doesn't do) and it's made by a Good Aligned spell.
Unholy water hurts Good outsiders (something negative does) but nothing else (something negative energy doesn't do) and is made by an Evil Aligned spell.
|
|
My point is it is highly likely that something which can affect alignments so strongly has been investigated by the gods. At the very least, it should be entirely possible to do so for the gods... So what is your problem with that? I'm not saying that it is something in text.Any number of ways? Any rule of the universe should be discoverable. And any god dedicated to good, evil, magic or universal laws in general could have the want to figure it out.Should be. Is? Maybe. Already done? Maybe. Just because you've created an theoretical experiment doesn't mean it's been carried out, or was successful if it was.I don't have a problem with them or others investigating the nature of alignment.
It's the "one universal answer to how many aligned spells I need to use" that I have a problem with, which is what this conversation was kinda based around.
That should be discoverable too, since the Gods are known to whisper in your ear when you get close to changing alignment or falling(this is a suggesting to GMs on how to handle it). If they know how much evil an evil spell does and how evil you are... they can add the two together to know the answer.
But, I'm just saying, they should either know or be able to discover how much evil an evil spell does. Knowing that makes the whole system answerable.
If I do this will I turn evil? Yes they can answer it.
If I do this, this, then this, then that will I turn evil? Shake 8-ball again.
|
|
Um, yes they are.
Holy water hurts undead (something positive energy does) and evil outsiders (something positive energy doesn't do) and it's made by a Good Aligned spell.
Unholy water hurts Good outsiders (something negative does) but nothing else (something negative energy doesn't do) and is made by an Evil Aligned spell.
Find one line of text that states "The outcome of an aligned spell is aligned, on top of casting the spell which is an aligned action" or "holy water is good aligned/unholy water is evil aligned". Or are you trying to argue your table rules?
|
|
I can see Asmodeus and the Archdevils doing so, but Nethys, Pharasma, and the Ushers I can't see having a reason to. One is the definition of magically neutral and the others are judges with no claim to the soul one way or the other. Considering the later would be the ones to make the final call on you they would even be able to tell you as an individual howe it will work in your case.
Well Nethys is b%~#!&~ f+&$ing crazy so that should speak for itself.
As for Pharasma, hmm. Would she answer correctly? Would she answer at all? I don't think she would based on her observance of Fate, but that's just my interpretation of her.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
My point is it is highly likely that something which can affect alignments so strongly has been investigated by the gods. At the very least, it should be entirely possible to do so for the gods... So what is your problem with that? I'm not saying that it is something in text.Any number of ways? Any rule of the universe should be discoverable. And any god dedicated to good, evil, magic or universal laws in general could have the want to figure it out.Should be. Is? Maybe. Already done? Maybe. Just because you've created an theoretical experiment doesn't mean it's been carried out, or was successful if it was.I don't have a problem with them or others investigating the nature of alignment.
It's the "one universal answer to how many aligned spells I need to use" that I have a problem with, which is what this conversation was kinda based around.
That should be discoverable too, since the Gods are known to whisper in your ear when you get close to changing alignment or falling(this is a suggesting to GMs on how to handle it). If they know how much evil an evil spell does and how evil you are... they can add the two together to know the answer.
But, I'm just saying, they should either know or be able to discover how much evil an evil spell does. Knowing that makes the whole system answerable.If I do this will I turn evil? Yes they can answer it.
If I do this, this, then this, then that will I turn evil? Shake 8-ball again.
So what? If they know the answer to the first question, then you can ask... "If a creature is purely good does casting an evil spell and performing no other aligned actions make them neutral?" then you ask "If a creature is purely good does casting two evil spells and performing no other aligned actions make them neutral?" so on and so forth till you find the magic number. Then you ask a similar set of questions for neutral to evil. Then, you ask question from evil to neutral to insure that it is the same.
|
|
Find one line of text that states "The outcome of an aligned spell is aligned, on top of casting the spell which is an aligned action" or "holy water is good/unholy water is evil". Or are you trying to argue your table rules?Um, yes they are.
Holy water hurts undead (something positive energy does) and evil outsiders (something positive energy doesn't do) and it's made by a Good Aligned spell.
Unholy water hurts Good outsiders (something negative does) but nothing else (something negative energy doesn't do) and is made by an Evil Aligned spell.
-_-
Find me one of text that says they aren't.
And the mockery of having everything I mention dismissed as "house rules" gone past annoying.
|
|
So what? If they know the answer to the first question, then you can ask... "If a creature is purely good does casting an evil spell and performing no other aligned actions make them neutral?" then you ask "If a creature is purely good does casting two evil spells and performing no other aligned actions make them neutral?" so on and so forth till you find the magic number. Then you ask a similar set of questions for neutral...My point is it is highly likely that something which can affect alignments so strongly has been investigated by the gods. At the very least, it should be entirely possible to do so for the gods... So what is your problem with that? I'm not saying that it is something in text.Any number of ways? Any rule of the universe should be discoverable. And any god dedicated to good, evil, magic or universal laws in general could have the want to figure it out.Should be. Is? Maybe. Already done? Maybe. Just because you've created an theoretical experiment doesn't mean it's been carried out, or was successful if it was.I don't have a problem with them or others investigating the nature of alignment.
It's the "one universal answer to how many aligned spells I need to use" that I have a problem with, which is what this conversation was kinda based around.
That should be discoverable too, since the Gods are known to whisper in your ear when you get close to changing alignment or falling(this is a suggesting to GMs on how to handle it). If they know how much evil an evil spell does and how evil you are... they can add the two together to know the answer.
But, I'm just saying, they should either know or be able to discover how much evil an evil spell does. Knowing that makes the whole system answerable.If I do this will I turn evil? Yes they can answer it.
If I do this, this, then this, then that will I turn evil? Shake 8-ball again.
Except the answers would be completely different for every single person. That's why this line of questioning doesn't really work.
|
|
You contact your deity—or agents thereof—and ask questions that can be answered by a simple yes or no. (A cleric of no particular deity contacts a philosophically allied deity.) You are allowed one such question per caster level. The answers given are correct within the limits of the entity's knowledge. "Unclear" is a legitimate answer, because powerful beings of the Outer Planes are not necessarily omniscient. In cases where a one-word answer would be misleading or contrary to the deity's interests, a short phrase (five words or less) may be given as an answer instead.
The spell, at best, provides information to aid character decisions. The entities contacted structure their answers to further their own purposes. If you lag, discuss the answers, or go off to do anything else, the spell ends.
This just means that the deities don't know everything there is to know, may not know the future, or are limited as the DM's knowledge about a given topic. It DOES NOT mean that they are morons, and knowing just how many sorts of actions is enough to strip them of one of their claimed souls for eternity is probably pretty dang pertinent to them, especially if it's another deity (like Asmodeus tempting people with Infernal Healing) literally poaching on them, they have a pretty vested interest in it.
Commune is a 5th level spell, and a costly one at that, and so is clearly there for more than just screwing over players. In fact, as a Cleric only spell, that literally allows the caster to speak directly with the deity, it's something that only a trusted and experienced follower even have access to.
|
|
Find one line of text that states "The outcome of an aligned spell is aligned, on top of casting the spell which is an aligned action" or "holy water is good/unholy water is evil". Or are you trying to argue your table rules?Um, yes they are.
Holy water hurts undead (something positive energy does) and evil outsiders (something positive energy doesn't do) and it's made by a Good Aligned spell.
Unholy water hurts Good outsiders (something negative does) but nothing else (something negative energy doesn't do) and is made by an Evil Aligned spell.
-_-
Find me one of text that says they aren't.
And having everything I mention dismissed as "house rules" is going oust simply annoying.
Then stop arguing house rules as fact? That would make things much simpler for me as well. (But, certainly I haven't called out everything you've mentioned as a house rule... that is an extreme exaggeration. I only called out that which is not held true in the books.)
I already showed where positive energy is not good aligned. You can check the Pathfinder cosmology if you want, the positive plane is not good aligned. This holds true for the opposite negative energy, it is not evil. Nothing in the spell says they are good or evil, nothing in the item descriptions say they are good or evil...Basically, you are arguing that "if it doesn't say it isn't x, I can say it is x and then it is fact". In other words, "all barbarians gain a fly speed because no book says they do not gain a fly speed" can be true because no book says they don't gain a fly speed. Which is a bad argument and if you say all barbarians fly that is a definite house rule.
|
|
Except the answers would be completely different for every single person. That's why this line of questioning doesn't really work.
Why would it be different for each person? No part of the question uses a variable that is based on the asker of the question, but instead on the idealized "perfectly pure good" being.
|
|
You contact your deity—or agents thereof—and ask questions that can be answered by a simple yes or no. (A cleric of no particular deity contacts a philosophically allied deity.) You are allowed one such question per caster level. The answers given are correct within the limits of the entity's knowledge. "Unclear" is a legitimate answer, because powerful beings of the Outer Planes are not necessarily omniscient. In cases where a one-word answer would be misleading or contrary to the deity's interests, a short phrase (five words or less) may be given as an answer instead.
The spell, at best, provides information to aid character decisions. The entities contacted structure their answers to further their own purposes. If you lag, discuss the answers, or go off to do anything else, the spell ends.
This just means that the deities don't know everything there is to know, may not know the future, or are limited as the DM's knowledge about a given topic. It DOES NOT mean that they are morons, and knowing just how many sorts of actions is enough to strip them of one of their claimed souls for eternity is probably pretty dang pertinent to them, especially if it's another deity (like Asmodeus tempting people with Infernal Healing) literally poaching on them, they have a pretty vested interest in it.
Commune is a 5th level spell, and a costly one at that, and so is clearly there for more than just screwing over players. In fact, as a Cleric only spell, that literally allows the caster to speak directly with the deity, it's something that only a trusted and experienced follower even have access to.
Well cleric's can't cast opposed alignment spells themselves so they would have to be asking for someone else, and that's where uncertainty comes into play.