|
My DM likes to make this face at me that says I'm doing something terrible, right? Like I'm a terrible human being for casting infernal healing to heal my companions and that he won't allow evil characters because his world is full of good and blah.
So my question is thus:
Say character A is a good character. It says so on his character sheet after all. Character A uses a wand of Infernal Healing to heal the wounded. Character A should turn evil with relying on evil spell uses.
But at the same time:
Character B is an evil character. It says so on his character sheet after all. Character B uses a wand of Holy Smite (a good spell) to murder the neutral peasant masses and other evil characters. Character B should turn good with relying on good spell uses.
Is using an evil aligned tool to do good things evil? Is using a good aligned tool to do evil things good?
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yup. Same for Chaos and Law, which many people seem to forget about. For some reason these discussions always revolve around just good and evil.
EDIT: Pathfinder Unchained introduced a sliding alignment scale that I like a lot. It addresses all four directions equally.
It sounds like you want a campaign where you can dive deeper into dark waters than your DM is willing to allow. There seems to be some unhappiness when you are called on it when you push his boundaries. He is the GM, who has ostensibly put in the work to put together a story that he is telling you your character's actions don't fit in.
You can keep pushing until you are booted or until you trash the game. (Wouldn't that just show that judgmental DM what for?)
Alternately, you could try playing a character suitable for whatever he has in mind, or go find a game more suited to your tastes.
As a Rules Question™, yes, using evil-aligned stuff is evil, and using good-aligned stuff is good.
If you really want to "unchain" yourself, though, ditch alignment.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It sounds like you want a campaign where you can dive deeper into dark waters than your DM is willing to allow.
Woah there! Let's stick to the topic. I may want to use more effective healing spells than the DM wants. You got me there! CLW just doesn't cut it for me. Why roll 1d8+1 when I can get 10 and immunity to bleed?
if you cast evil spell you become more and more evil same for good spell, so to off-set that cast protection from evil, since its a good spell you become more and more good each time you cast it, if your GM say you will become evil if you continue to cast that evil spell just spam cast good spell and say i'm good now i have cast spell with the good descriptor and are now more good.
So it does work like that...isn't that just weird? The Protection from X spells are great for alignment shifting then! Good to know.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Maybe you should start thinking of it as more than just a set of numbers. I ran my game where evil spells drew their power from sources in an evil way.
For example, infernal healing comes from power derived by the death of the elderly. The more you use it, the higher the death rate in the area becomes as the elderly seem to succumb to their illnesses more readily. It eventually starts to add up though has little impact on game mechanics.
Kind of like " every time you point a finger a fairy dies " .
Casting protection from evil is brought about by the laughter of the innocents. Maybe doing this can cause some children somewhere to be me more light hearted, or it keeps the, from learning some of the brutality in the world for justnthat little bit longer, maintaining their innocence.
Now the use of those spells has real meaning for the alignment associated with them.
If all your u do is use these things as numbers, then alignment and setting mean nothing. Roleplay games are meant to be played in a setting though, not just a series of numbers to beat some arbitrary challenge of a suitable CR.
If all you're doing is looking at numbers, you're better off playing board games or card games.
It's explicitly up to the DM how intention interacts with the casting of spells with alignment descriptors so you're not going to get far without their buy in.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Is using an evil aligned tool to do good things evil? Is using a good aligned tool to do evil things good?
My version of this is that using Evil spells isn't so much an evil act as a corrupting act. It's not evil in the way that fireballing an orphanage is evil, but you're channelling Evil through your body, and that's bad for your mind. It makes you want to do evil.
Similarly, an evil wizard who casts Protection From Evil to protect himself while dealing with demons is channelling the forces of Good. This might give him feelings of remorse about the evil things he's doing.
Anyway, it's a good idea to get some agreement with your GM over how this works, because the rules aren't going to help you. (The rules suggest that just casting Infernal Healing five times in a row to help your party is enough to turn you into a card-carrying member of Team Evil.)
That's a good take on it, I feel.
RPG Superstar 2011 Top 32
|
Maybe you should start thinking of it as more than just a set of numbers. I ran my game where evil spells drew their power from sources in an evil way.
For example, infernal healing comes from power derived by the death of the elderly. The more you use it, the higher the death rate in the area becomes as the elderly seem to succumb to their illnesses more readily. It eventually starts to add up though has little impact on game mechanics.
Kind of like " every time you point a finger a fairy dies " .
Casting protection from evil is brought about by the laughter of the innocents. Maybe doing this can cause some children somewhere to be me more light hearted, or it keeps the, from learning some of the brutality in the world for justnthat little bit longer, maintaining their innocence.
Now the use of those spells has real meaning for the alignment associated with them.
This is very similar to what I do. Infernal healing brings evil misfortune into the world, so at the same time your adventurer friend is getting his 10 hp back, a small child is falling out of a tree and breaking his arm. When you cast a Good spell someone some minor positive thing happens - the farmer finds a pouch of coins in his field, that sort of thing. Generally casting Good spells makes the world a better place for everyone, and casting Evil spells makes it worse. Even using them for the opposite ends, generally, won't overcome the inherent nature of the spell itself. And I find the situations where it does to be fairly contrived.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It sounds like you want a campaign where you can dive deeper into dark waters than your DM is willing to allow.Woah there! Let's stick to the topic. I may want to use more effective healing spells than the DM wants. You got me there! CLW just doesn't cut it for me. Why roll 1d8+1 when I can get 10 and immunity to bleed?
So it does work like that...isn't that just weird? The Protection from X spells are great for alignment shifting then! Good to know.
Actually CH, I got that from this:
My DM likes to make this face at me that says I'm doing something terrible, right? Like I'm a terrible human being for casting infernal healing to heal my companions and that he won't allow evil characters because his world is full of good and blah.
Rather a lack of respect for your GM's preference is shown there. I understand that a LOT of Forum-Folk hate the objections to such a clever and efficient spell on Thematic, Role Play grounds. It is, however, your GM's table, and therefore his preferences that hold sway here.
|
|
Oh I know. But that's not what we're discussing. Casting evil spells for good reasons and casting good spells for evil reasons isn't directly related to "Crayfish's GM likes to make faces at Crayfish when Crayfish says he'll be doing X". And I really enjoy doing X. And my GM really likes to make faces.
But the idea that alignment spells alter the world in some way is worthwhile. I like it as an idea, but if a farmer were to find a bag of gold because some villain is casting explode-bad-guy on neutral people because irony fuels his hateful heart...then I am less convinced on the idea's implementation. However! If the villain slowly feels like blowing people up isn't for him, since he's channeling all that good, then I can dig that.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Agreed that there is HUUUUUUGE potential for ridiculousness here. There is also a lot of room for some very nuanced, deep-story stuff. Slow, insidious, difficult to detect corruptions from healings based on demon blood or unholy water. Better yet, the Arch-Demon who created the spell in the first place has a way to use that taint against the poor healed victim.
Just treating Infernal Healing as an efficient tool in your toolbox is just Unimaginative, one of the original sins of Role Play.
|
Yeah, there's a huge amount of room for aligned magic to influence the casters - I generally prefer this approach over the magic just causing bad things to happen. Infernal Healing in particular is one of the best examples of this, really. While the spell itself doesn't create any lasting alignment effects on its subjects, when you consider the components and nature of the spell, there's a whole bunch of implications.
The spell involves anointing friends fiend blood. Fiends are malevolence made manifest, cosmic entities formed by the tortured souls of the most corrupt people in the world's history. Alternatively you can use unholy water, but I don't think the implications of that are much better in a setting with defined alignments as active forces.
There's a lot of room for exploring its use in grey morality campaigns, but its definitely a no-no in most black-and-white stories, unless you eschew the fluff of the spell. And then it comes down to why we have Infernal Healing as a spell, but no Lesser Rejuvenation.
On an unrelated note, this whole topic reminds me of one of my favourite niche feats: Asmodeus's Conversion Channel.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's important to keep out-of-character logic separate from in-character logic in these discussions.
There is no "good" reason for a character to cast an [evil] spell. If your character believes that there is, then they're slowly succumbing to evil. If your GM says "Doing X will result in Y", and you proceed to have your character do X, then you're doing it because you want Y to happen.
Saying "CLW just doesn't cut it for me. Why roll 1d8+1 when I can get 10 and immunity to bleed?" is an out-of-character justification. Same for casting protection from evil as a remedy.
It's easy to justify in-character actions based on out-of-character efficiency or optimization. It's more rare to see in-character actions based on in-character consequences.
If your character is fine milking Devil Blood or hoarding Unholy Water for its benefits, then you should be fine out-of-character with what happens to them. It's then up to you to decide where they want to go from there. Do they want to continue down the path to darkness? Or would they eventually see the error of their ways and want to atone?
All of these choices can lead to fun roleplay circumstances, but all too often they instead lead to out-of-character drama.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
There is no "good" reason for a character to cast an [evil] spell.
"My friends are all bleeding to death and as a wizard this is the only healing spell I can cast."
Seems like a pretty "good" reason to me.Even if there might be consequences.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There is no "good" reason for a character to cast an [evil] spell."My friends are all bleeding to death and as a wizard this is the only healing spell I can cast."
Seems like a pretty "good" reason to me.
Even if there might be consequences.
This. Sometimes "less evil" is the most "good" option available.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
...is an out-of-character justification. Same for casting protection from evil as a remedy.
If Evil spells infect your soul with corrupting evil, casting Good spells to drive away that evil seems like a pretty reasonable in-character action.
If Evil spells cause evil to enter the world (in the 'someone breaks a leg somewhere' interpretation), casting Good spells to balance things out seems like something a Neutral character might think was justifiable.
(Although by that logic, you should probably stay at home casting nothing but Good-aligned spells. Sounds like you could achieve much more that way than you could by adventuring.)
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
There is no "good" reason for a character to cast an [evil] spell."My friends are all bleeding to death and as a wizard this is the only healing spell I can cast."
Seems like a pretty "good" reason to me.
Even if there might be consequences.
Of course, assuming that the wizard is not reading this spell from a scroll taken as loot after a battle, he already committed the evil acts of learning and preparing this spell without a good reason.
|
|
There is no "good" reason for a character to cast an [evil] spell."My friends are all bleeding to death and as a wizard this is the only healing spell I can cast."
Seems like a pretty "good" reason to me.Even if there might be consequences.
If there's consequences, then it wasn't a "good" reason, was it?
|
|
...is an out-of-character justification. Same for casting protection from evil as a remedy.If Evil spells infect your soul with corrupting evil, casting Good spells to drive away that evil seems like a pretty reasonable in-character action.
Characters are not aware of mechanics and rules minutia, unless their GM exposes them to that sort of system in-game.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If there's consequences, then it wasn't a "good" reason, was it?
That kind of depends on what the consequences were and what the alternatives were. "Well, the party all bled to death and the quest failed and the Whispering Tyrant awoke and hundreds of thousands of people died, but I kept myself from having impure thoughts, and that's the most important thing."
Characters are not aware of mechanics and rules minutia, unless their GM exposes them to that sort of system in-game.
Then presumably they're all unaware that certain spells are Evil?
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Characters are not aware of mechanics and rules minutia, unless their GM exposes them to that sort of system in-game....is an out-of-character justification. Same for casting protection from evil as a remedy.If Evil spells infect your soul with corrupting evil, casting Good spells to drive away that evil seems like a pretty reasonable in-character action.
Mechanics and rules minutia have the same weight in the setting as the laws of physics do in real life.
Some are indeed subtle, others are pretty damn obvious
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
There is no "good" reason for a character to cast an [evil] spell."My friends are all bleeding to death and as a wizard this is the only healing spell I can cast."
Seems like a pretty "good" reason to me.
Even if there might be consequences.
A good reason, maybe, a Good reason, no.
You can make all the pragmatic arguments you want, but you fail to take into account that in-game there are "Fates Worse Than Death". As your character's soul is falling into the hells, victim of contamination and insidious corruption, do you think he will be thinking that the Wizard made a good decision?This is not a computer moderated game. There are always other options, falsely narrowing the choices to Die Now or accept Infernal Healing is spurious.
|
|
If there's consequences, then it wasn't a "good" reason, was it?That kind of depends on what the consequences were and what the alternatives were. "Well, the party all bled to death and the quest failed and the Whispering Tyrant awoke and hundreds of thousands of people died, but I kept myself from having impure thoughts, and that's the most important thing."
I never stated "most important".
I think you're getting the different definitions of "good" mixed up here.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
A wierd, but very germain thought just popped into my head.
- Regardless of moral implications, any healing releases the healed character from pain, which is effectively a pleasurable thing.
- Infernal Healing says the target detects as an evil creature for the duration of the spell and can sense the evil of the magic
- Celestial Healing says the target radiates the aura of a good creature for the duration of the spell and can sense the righteousness of the magic
- Both Spells specifically cite that this allignment shift is temporary.
They are both rather insidious if you think about it. Both spell's cause the pleasure of being healed to be tied to a sense of evil or righteousness. This is textbook Pavlovian Conditioning.
|
|
What I like is that Celestial Healing uses angel blood/holy water. Holy water is a very easy thing to come by, as you can fill a tub with water and cast a spell. Much like unholy water. But hoarding angel blood...I find that strange as a player and often as a character unless said character is evil.
Like, does a guy summon an angel and say, "I need to cut you. Give me your blood!" followed by some maniacal laughter and lightning effects?
Regardless of moral implications, any healing releases the healed character from pain, which is effectively a pleasurable thing.
See, I like this. Not with this statement alone, but with other thoughts, I often see healbot clerics as sadists. They're just waiting for you to get hurt so they can heal you, make you feel better, and to encourage you to get back into the fight to get hurt again. It's a vicious cycle that really only benefits the healer. Who is going to think about you getting hurt, often. Awwww yeah.
|
|
I ran a witch character like that. She was evil, and her healing was unpleasant (pure roleplay on my part).
She would provide long term "care" for the group but they often woke up with her standing over the top of them staring at their wounds and smiling weirdly.
In the end, the other players started refusing my healing in preference to wands and potions. I'd wield the wand, but it's magic wasn't unpleasant like my natural spells.
What I like is that Celestial Healing uses angel blood/holy water. Holy water is a very easy thing to come by, as you can fill a tub with water and cast a spell. Much like unholy water. But hoarding angel blood...I find that strange as a player and often as a character unless said character is evil.
Well, with Eschew Materials or False Focus, you can get away without getting the holy/unholy water or the angel/demon blood.
/cevah
While I like some of the suggestions that aligned spells affect the world around you in subtle ways, IE evil spells causing misery in the world somewhere, it does make it hard to justify clerics going to sleep with spell slots or not making a protection from X wand every single day.
|
|
While I like some of the suggestions that aligned spells affect the world around you in subtle ways, IE evil spells causing misery in the world somewhere, it does make it hard to justify clerics going to sleep with spell slots or not making a protection from X wand every single day.
Outside of adventurers, who's to say that clerics do?
I mean, it makes sense that they expend all their god gifted power making the world better for their gods beliefs.However, there's also the very real consideration that keeping something in the tank, in case of emergency, is a real thing.
Also remember, they get their spells back at an allotted time, unlike prepared arcane casters. So they could hold on reserve then splurge good magic everywhere an hour before ritual refill.