|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Your second example doesnt actually hold up that well.I go off their write ups when it talks about their drives, and how they’re statted up in official products.Official products? You mean like this and this?
Creating an Ectoplasmic Creature
"Ectoplasmic" is an acquired template that can be added to any corporeal creature (other than an undead), referred to hereafter as the base creature.Challenge Rating: Same as the base creature +1.
Alignment: Usually chaotic evil.
And Rysky is saying that the majority are evil so a few exceptions is not really proving anything more than me finding examples of a few redeemed fiends.
|
I go off their write ups when it talks about their drives, and how they’re statted up in official products.Official products? You mean like this and this?
Never seen the Deathweb before, neat, undead vermin.
As for the Ectoplasmic creature, I said “read their write ups” for a reason.
“Even more so than most undead beings, creatures born of ectoplasm live hateful existences, filled with nothing but a lust for destruction and suffering. They have no bodily needs and require no sustenance; the only thing an ectoplasmic creature feeds upon is its own hatred of the living.
Those who suffer this sorrowful fate, by misfortune or choice, are usually stuck in their ectoplasmic prisons until death grants them sweet release from this unlife. The transition from death to ectoplasmic undeath is a torturous ordeal, as is retaining the horrid form into which the creature is reborn. Often, this persistent agony drives these beings beyond mad, creating within an insatiable rage akin to that experienced by frustrated ghosts and other haunted souls.
An ectoplasmic creature's burning desperation and embitterment often pushes it toward violence: most such beings fling themselves into battle willingly, killing to satiate their natural hunger for the suffering of others, while simultaneously hoping to be killed and thus freed of their own suffering own.”
“Alignment: Usually Chaotic Evil”
|
|
Your second example doesnt actually hold up that well.I go off their write ups when it talks about their drives, and how they’re statted up in official products.Official products? You mean like this and this?And Rysky is saying that the majority are evil so a few exceptions is not really proving anything more than me finding examples of a few redeemed fiends.Creating an Ectoplasmic Creature
"Ectoplasmic" is an acquired template that can be added to any corporeal creature (other than an undead), referred to hereafter as the base creature.Challenge Rating: Same as the base creature +1.
Alignment: Usually chaotic evil.
Ninjaed me, and Thankies :3
|
|
If it was something like 1 in 10 then you would have some basis, but when it's closer 1 in 1,000,000 not so much.
Getting shot in the head is fatal. Someone getting shot in the head and miraculously surviving does not mean that getting shot in the head is not fatal, just that they were an exception.
An exception does not disprove a rule, enough exceptions that become their own rule does.
|
|
It has a 90% fatality, with the possible recovery of the remaining 10% being impossible to determine if I remember correctly.
The distinction between general and technical.
General: Undead are Evil.
Technical: All Undead except that specific one over there for plot reasons are Evil.
As for Goblinoids they are Humanoids that are not powered by an evil/corrupting power source.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You two operate with different kinds of logic. Mathematical logic is very strict: A single counterexample renders an entire statement wrong, while having a few examples in favor of a statement doesn't prove it. This one is handy when it comes to abstract things.
Humans instinctively use a different of logic though, generalizing from examples to statements, and sticking with statements despite a small minority of counterexamples. In the Stone Age this was the more effective way - there was no time for working on proofs when a predator engages you. Even nowadays, you sometimes want to stick with it - you might have no proof the city thugs want to beat you up, but you should still avoid conflict with them.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I go off their write ups when it talks about their drives, and how they’re statted up in official products.
Um...I'm pretty sure I can find more non-Evil undead mentioned in Pathfinder products than non-Evil Orcs.
Nobody's arguing most undead aren't evil, most of them are. But it's not inherent in the way it is for Evil Outsiders, their instincts just incline them that way...which is actually also true for Orcs.
|
|
I go off their write ups when it talks about their drives, and how they’re statted up in official products.Um...I'm pretty sure I can find more non-Evil undead mentioned in Pathfinder products than non-Evil Orcs.
Nobody's arguing most undead aren't evil, most of them are. But it's not inherent in the way it is for Evil Outsiders, their instincts just incline them that way...which is actually also true for Orcs.
That would actually be an interesting search and comparison.
But even then the writeups of Undead push them past non-Good into Evil as opposed to Orcs, which are Humanoids reinforced through their Culture (like Gnolls).
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Most Orc writeups emphasize their in-built tendencies towards violent uncontrollable rages (something likely to lead to Evil) every bit as much as things that talk about the undead talk about their unpleasant impulses.
AS for numbers, there's a LN Vampire in Kaer Maga, a LN Mummy in The Dragon's Demand, a Neutral Attic Whisperer, a CG Ghost, and a LN Juju Zombie, all from Undead Unleashed. I'm pretty sure some other non-Evil undead (especially ghosts) have cropped up elsewhere...but I don't know exactly where, I admit.
Meanwhile, I know of only one book that features non-Evil Orcs (Belkzen, Hold of the Orc Hordes)...and it has precisely three non-Evil Orcs given a profile within it (a CN Druid, a CN Ranger, and a CG Barbarian/Warpriest of Sarenrae).
Now, in fairness, those are all tribal leaders, and particularly with the Good one the Tribe as a whole is implied to be non-Evil...but that's an artifact of there being more orcs than self-willed undead, not necessarily Good being more common among them.
Now, personally, I'd probably say non-Evil Undead are a bit rarer than Good Orcs...but that's purely a personal preference, not anything any book has to say on the subject. And it's a matter of slight degree in numbers between non-Evil percentages, not a matter of exponential differences like there are between either of those and, say, Demons.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Just to throw some not-terribly-helpful into the fire, the shadow companion that accompanies a Shadowdancer shares her alignment, which can be evil, neutral or good. Granted, that discusses a creature-as-class feature, and the druid's companion is precedent aplenty for animals that are class features having wildly different game mechanics than animals that are encountered in the wild...
Also, I vaguely recall that the Creative Director didn't like that specific example/rule, so I'd expect it to be Juju Oracle'd out of existence in a newer version.
Negative energy may be neutral, with no mechanical association with evil, and no less 'hungry for life' than positive-energy-driven life (which actually *must* devour and kill other living things to survive, unlike many undead, which can survive indefinitely without doing so), but the game has many strong ties between it and evil (such as evil clerics only channeling negative energy, or most undead being evil), despite there being less support for positive energy being associated with good, which kind of makes the whole thing inconsistent and lopsided (and would be equally nonsensical, since positive energy is the generative and sustaining force behind all sorts of horrible living things, like cancer and demons and those spiny fish that swim up your... ahem). :)
|
|
Just to throw some not-terribly-helpful into the fire, the shadow companion that accompanies a Shadowdancer shares her alignment, which can be evil, neutral or good. Granted, that discusses a creature-as-class feature, and the druid's companion is precedent aplenty for animals that are class features having wildly different game mechanics than animals that are encountered in the wild...
Also, I vaguely recall that the Creative Director didn't like that specific example/rule, so I'd expect it to be Juju Oracle'd out of existence in a newer version.
Negative energy may be neutral, with no mechanical association with evil, and no less 'hungry for life' than positive-energy-driven life (which actually *must* devour and kill other living things to survive, unlike many undead, which can survive indefinitely without doing so), but the game has many strong ties between it and evil (such as evil clerics only channeling negative energy, or most undead being evil), despite there being less support for positive energy being associated with good, which kind of makes the whole thing inconsistent and lopsided (and would be equally nonsensical, since positive energy is the generative and sustaining force behind all sorts of horrible living things, like cancer and demons and those spiny fish that swim up your... ahem). :)
The Shadowdnacer’s Shadow gets brought up a lot but the more I think on it it’s actually a horrible example. The Shadow can’t choose to be Good, let alone any other Alignment, it’s whatever Alignmnet its Shadowdancer is, and if they change the Shadow’s Alignment is forcibly changed as well. It has zero say in its alignment, zero choice, no free will. A mindless Undead has more freedom in their alignment in that regard.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Questions for anyone:
If a PC was turned into an orc by Reincarnate, would you expect them to become rage-filled and have a tendency to evil?
If a PC was turned into a wraith (and gained free will because the original wraith was killed) would you be OK with the player saying they had decided not to be evil and wanted to continue helping the party?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
@ Matthew Downie -
1) No. While they could probably have fun playing up the Always Angry aspect, orcs aren't any more inherently evil than the Hulk.
2) No, getting turned into a wraith means your character got destroyed and replaced with a monster. The party needs to kill the wraith so that the PC can be brought back.
1) No. While they could probably have fun playing up the Always Angry aspect, orcs aren't any more inherently evil than the Hulk.
2) No, getting turned into a wraith means your character got destroyed and replaced with a monster.
That would be my answer. Do any of the "nothing says undead are inherently more evil than orcs" posters disagree?
|
|
2) No, getting turned into a wraith means your character got destroyed and replaced with a monster. The party needs to kill the wraith so that the PC can be brought back.
Agreed.
It doesn't matter if the living person was a 1st level Fighter with an Int of 8, or a 12th level wizard with an Int of 22, the wraith is *always* going to be a 5 HD creature with an Int of 16, and totally different feats and skills and languages known.
The wraith (shadow, wight, etc.) is absolutely not the person that died to make it, unlike a ghost or vampire that is a template placed over a formerly living creature and retains skills, feats, languages, class levels, memories, etc.
If it's having fixed 5HD that's the problem, what if a PC was turned into a free-willed Vampire? Would you be OK with them saying, "I have free will so I've decided to continue to be a lawful good adventurer?"
If it's having fixed 5HD that's the problem, what if a PC was turned into a free-willed Vampire? Would you be OK with them saying, "I have free will so I've decided to continue to be a lawful good adventurer?"
If the player actually wants to play an evil monster trying to struggle back to redemption, that could be interesting. I'd probably put it up to the group as to whether the group as a whole wants to deal with having a monster who dies in sunlight (among other problems) in the party.
If they just want to continue on as though getting transformed into a vampire meant nothing beyond getting a bunch of cool powers, well, no. They're doing it wrong.
Because the PC has still been destroyed and replaced with an evil monster - though in this case, the monster can do a very good job faking being the former PC, and can still function in an adventuring party. (Though if they're of a class that's incompatible with being evil - like paladin or being a cleric of a good deity - then they lost their powers and need to take steps to recover them.)
Still, it'd be far less of a headache for everyone involved to just kill the vampire and bring the PC back to life.
(And yes, I will take the stance that a person who attains lichdom is in fact committing suicide and replacing themselves with a monster that just happens to be fairly similar to them.)
Pathfinder Undead having prescriptive alignment, like true dragons and outsiders, is part of their quirks.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Hey everyone! Just wanted to let you know the Expanded and Updated New Paths Compendium Hardcover is now available right here on Paizo.com!!
Expanded and Updated New Paths Compendium Hardcover
Includes the White Necromancer plus 11 other new classes (plus archetypes, spells, feats, and more)
Christmas bonus soon know what I'm getting!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Christmas bonus soon know what I'm getting!Hey everyone! Just wanted to let you know the Expanded and Updated New Paths Compendium Hardcover is now available right here on Paizo.com!!
Expanded and Updated New Paths Compendium Hardcover
Includes the White Necromancer plus 11 other new classes (plus archetypes, spells, feats, and more)
A Greasemonkey script to filter out spam?
To OP of Ages Past: No. No they are not.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
That would be my answer. Do any of the "nothing says undead are inherently more evil than orcs" posters disagree?1) No. While they could probably have fun playing up the Always Angry aspect, orcs aren't any more inherently evil than the Hulk.
2) No, getting turned into a wraith means your character got destroyed and replaced with a monster.
As others have noted this isn't a good metric. There's no evidence that someone 'turned into' a wraith has any memories of their prior existence or any similarities to the person they were, while this is very much not true of Reincarnate.
If a PC became a Ghost, that's a better analogy, and no becoming a Ghost doesn't make you Evil.
Becoming a vampire is a grayer area given their particular nutritional needs, but I'd say a Good Aligned character could probably maintain such an alignment after becoming a vampire in theory...but only with great difficulty. Being a vampire (as opposed to being undead in general) clearly and explicitly does come with some harder to resist Evil impulses...but they aren't impossible to resist.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
So... I didn't really read ALL the posts because there are a LOT over a very short period of time, but from what I read it looks like people are arguing about how rare non-evil undead are. Not that there aren't any, but how few there are. I know I'm probably wrong, but from an outsider's standpoint, it looks like you guys are arguing just because you want to be right. The question is are they always evil. I haven't seen anyone say they are definitely are all evil. But I see people arguing about exact numbers that aren't. At the risk of drawing heavy fire... it's kinda funny to go back and read these posts having not been involved. It's like someone saying "There are SOME apples in the bucket!" followed by another saying, "No! There are a FEW apples in the bucket!"
178 posts, people. Just sayin'.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
That would be my answer. Do any of the "nothing says undead are inherently more evil than orcs" posters disagree?1) No. While they could probably have fun playing up the Always Angry aspect, orcs aren't any more inherently evil than the Hulk.
2) No, getting turned into a wraith means your character got destroyed and replaced with a monster.
As others have noted this isn't a good metric. There's no evidence that someone 'turned into' a wraith has any memories of their prior existence or any similarities to the person they were, while this is very much not true of Reincarnate.
If a PC became a Ghost, that's a better analogy, and no becoming a Ghost doesn't make you Evil.
Becoming a vampire is a grayer area given their particular nutritional needs, but I'd say a Good Aligned character could probably maintain such an alignment after becoming a vampire in theory...but only with great difficulty. Being a vampire (as opposed to being undead in general) clearly and explicitly does come with some harder to resist Evil impulses...but they aren't impossible to resist.
Actually by the rules when you become a Vampire your alignment is evil. You can't apply the template otherwise. Now that could change afterwards, but becoming a vampire does make you evil it seems.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
So... I didn't really read ALL the posts because there are a LOT over a very short period of time, but from what I read it looks like people are arguing about how rare non-evil undead are. Not that there aren't any, but how few there are. I know I'm probably wrong, but from an outsider's standpoint, it looks like you guys are arguing just because you want to be right. The question is are they always evil. I haven't seen anyone say they are definitely are all evil. But I see people arguing about exact numbers that aren't. At the risk of drawing heavy fire... it's kinda funny to go back and read these posts having not been involved. It's like someone saying "There are SOME apples in the bucket!" followed by another saying, "No! There are a FEW apples in the bucket!"
178 posts, people. Just sayin'.
Welcome to Paizo forums. Here's your smurf.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
LOL!
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Welcome to Paizo forums. Here's your smurf.So... I didn't really read ALL the posts because there are a LOT over a very short period of time, but from what I read it looks like people are arguing about how rare non-evil undead are. Not that there aren't any, but how few there are. I know I'm probably wrong, but from an outsider's standpoint, it looks like you guys are arguing just because you want to be right. The question is are they always evil. I haven't seen anyone say they are definitely are all evil. But I see people arguing about exact numbers that aren't. At the risk of drawing heavy fire... it's kinda funny to go back and read these posts having not been involved. It's like someone saying "There are SOME apples in the bucket!" followed by another saying, "No! There are a FEW apples in the bucket!"
178 posts, people. Just sayin'.
Crap that mans been infected with smurfitis someone get him...oh crap got me too. Quarantine!!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The general rule is that all undead are evil, with a few specific exceptions in the bestiaries and APs.
However there are literary examples that one could cite as exceptions to the rule, which is what lead to all the jokes about a certain character whose literary purpose is to challenge the norm of accepting any particular creature's predesignated assumed alignment.
I'm sure there's more, but given our medium, these are I believe the most relevant.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Actually by the rules when you become a Vampire your alignment is evil. You can't apply the template otherwise. Now that could change afterwards, but becoming a vampire does make you evil it seems.
Sure, but that's a weird rules artifact rather than a world-rule, specific to the vampire template (not undead in general), and also hardly matters. I mean, Alignment is descriptive. If you immediately start doing Good stuff you're gonna be Evil for a very short period of time since you have nothing to actually atone for.
So... I didn't really read ALL the posts because there are a LOT over a very short period of time, but from what I read it looks like people are arguing about how rare non-evil undead are. Not that there aren't any, but how few there are. I know I'm probably wrong, but from an outsider's standpoint, it looks like you guys are arguing just because you want to be right. The question is are they always evil. I haven't seen anyone say they are definitely are all evil. But I see people arguing about exact numbers that aren't. At the risk of drawing heavy fire... it's kinda funny to go back and read these posts having not been involved. It's like someone saying "There are SOME apples in the bucket!" followed by another saying, "No! There are a FEW apples in the bucket!"
178 posts, people. Just sayin'.
We're arguing whether there are more like 2% non-Evil undead...or more like .02%. Both are small numbers, but one is literally 100 times larger than the other, so the difference between them does indeed matter.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I can tell some examples i've had on non-evil undead.
In one of my campaigns the party came across little noble girl, who was vampire. She couldnt control her instincts and thus was forced to killand feed. The group decided to help her and hunted down an magical cup that was always filled with blood. The little girl ended up becoming the groups most valuable ally.
In another place there was a ghost who was cursed an unable to pass to afterlife. Tye group had to burn down the manor, and destroy the demon inside, after which the ghost rewarded them and passed on.
Another time they found a skeletal champion, who was guarding a magical sword. The skeleton told them only the ones who could defeat him in an honorable duel could take the sword. After being defeated, the skeltal champion said. "finally..my task is complete."
So, at the end of the day, unlike with demons and devils, evil is not in the undeads nature. Most of them are victims themselves, and just want to pass on back ti the grave. Its up to you as a GM to make it happen.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Actually by the rules when you become a Vampire your alignment is evil. You can't apply the template otherwise. Now that could change afterwards, but becoming a vampire does make you evil it seems.Sure, but that's a weird rules artifact rather than a world-rule, specific to the vampire template (not undead in general), and also hardly matters. I mean, Alignment is descriptive. If you immediately start doing Good stuff you're gonna be Evil for a very short period of time since you have nothing to actually atone for.
We're arguing whether there are more like 2% non-Evil undead...or more like .02%. Both are small numbers, but one is literally 100 times larger than the other, so the difference between them does indeed matter.So... I didn't really read ALL the posts because there are a LOT over a very short period of time, but from what I read it looks like people are arguing about how rare non-evil undead are. Not that there aren't any, but how few there are. I know I'm probably wrong, but from an outsider's standpoint, it looks like you guys are arguing just because you want to be right. The question is are they always evil. I haven't seen anyone say they are definitely are all evil. But I see people arguing about exact numbers that aren't. At the risk of drawing heavy fire... it's kinda funny to go back and read these posts having not been involved. It's like someone saying "There are SOME apples in the bucket!" followed by another saying, "No! There are a FEW apples in the bucket!"
178 posts, people. Just sayin'.
To the initial question, though, it doesn't matter at all. Even one non-evil undead is sufficient to settle the question.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
To the initial question, though, it doesn't matter at all. Even one non-evil undead is sufficient to settle the question.
Indisputably true. That question was thus answered definitively as soon as we started actually bringing up the stat-blocks of non-Evil undead in published Pathfinder products (which was real early on).
The discussion then evolved. :)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The answer is no, but just saying that can be misleading. Like using an average without context.
It's really just as many as the world designer wants.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I feel like anything in the position to think, make choices, and act on them can be any alignment whatsoever. The thing is? Most non-player characters do not need very much room to think, make choices, etc. to fulfill their roles in the story. So orcs are evil barbarian monsters until you need to have one that isn't. Fiends can't possibly redeemed because they're outsiders literally made of the essence evil, until you want to tell a story about one who does.
So since we have several examples (each requiring extraordinary circumstances) of literal demons becoming non-evil, I don't think it's a stretch to say that any intelligent undead could also become non-evil given extraordinary circumstances. I mean, the same AP which gives us a redeemed succubus also posits that a Lich is willing to make an earnest attempt at redemption.
But most of the things you find in dungeons don't really need to be characters, so much as obstacles, and insofar as they are characters they don't need to do anything the GM doesn't want them to do.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
If changed alignment didn't change you, most undead creatures would stop being evil because they have no particular need to do evil deeds. Since the vast majority of undead are evil, my interpretation is that the evil alignment is descriptive of their new personality. They might be able to become Good by doing good deeds, but they don't want to do good deeds (because they're evil) so they don't.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If changed alignment didn't change you, most undead creatures would stop being evil because they have no particular need to do evil deeds. Since the vast majority of undead are evil, my interpretation is that the evil alignment is descriptive of their new personality. They might be able to become Good by doing good deeds, but they don't want to do good deeds (because they're evil) so they don't.
That's not how Alignment works. The Helm of Opposite Alignment is the only thing that does, and has to include specific language to make that be the case. Language not included anywhere in, say, becoming a vampire.
Most undead stay Evil because they do have various unpleasant impulses now (like eating people) and see no reason to restrain them (heck, many don't have meaningful memories of their human lives, which gives them almost no reason to restrain their impulses).
Can a Ghoul become Good? Or a Wraith? Sure...but they have no real reason to in most cases. They don't really remember being human, and it's not like being nice is gonna get them much of anything.
As for vampires, most of them are under the control of their creator, who (if evil) is likely to have them doing Evil stuff pretty regularly. Add in their dietary requirements and Evil just becomes easiest. Most people take the path of least resistance most of the time.
And other free-willed undead who remember their lives are pretty rare. I mean, there are ghosts, but they're by far the most likely undead to not be Evil, and Liches...but they were Evil before becoming undead.
That's not how Alignment works. The Helm of Opposite Alignment is the only thing that does, and has to include specific language to make that be the case.
Not seeing much evidence for that in the Alignment rules.
A creature’s general moral and personal attitudes are represented by its alignment... Alignment exists primarily to define and summarize the moral and ethical tendencies of characters in a game...
Evil characters and creatures debase or destroy innocent life, whether for fun or profit... Neutral evil characters care only for themselves, and do whatever they think they can get away with... Whether a neutral evil character has chosen to practice evil for its own sake or—more often—simply has no empathy for others, the result is the same: cold, unfeeling cruelty...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If alignment was prescriptive instead of descriptive than it would be impossible to ever change your alignment non-magically. -.-
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Perhaps it's both?
Normally descriptive, but prescriptive when changed magically - like when a creature becomes undead?
Which isn't to say that some rare free willed undead wouldn't be able to change, but it wouldn't be just a matter of "Oh. I've got some weird magical evil label stuck on me, but I'm a good person, I'll just go on doing what I've always done and it'll come off."
The rules and setting are actually really specific about when Alignment is prescriptive (the Helm of Opposite Alignment makes it so, as does being an Alignment Subtype Outsider). Undead are never at any point listed as such a situation.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Undead are generally evil except for certain special circumstances. Outsiders with alignment subtypes are even more hardcoded. I dont think anyone is saying that normally evil creatures must be evil 100% all of the time as a rule. What is being said is that evil is the default status.
This is even listed in the rules, and has been stated by at least one Paizo developer.
The alignments listed for each monster in this book represent the norm for those monsters—they can vary as you require them to in order to serve the needs of your campaign.
That means basically what has been said. If the book says that ___ is evil then it is likely to be evil. So if <insert alignment> is normal then anything else is not normal.