Magic and alignment.

[economics]

Hello everyone, I'm a new player to FRC, and I am considering making this server my primary server. Spare time is difficult for me to come by these days, but I'll be playing here as often as I can. Anyway, I was planning on making a sorcerer character, and enchantment will be the focus of his magic, and even though persuade is a CC skill, he'll be focusing on that as he develops. So the question I had was related to combat spells. Would it be hokey for him to be casting something like vampiric touch if he happened to have a good alignment? What's your opinion on "dark magic" spells in general for good aligned characters? If he commands dark magic as his primary means of offense, should I make his alignment somewhere outside of the good part of the spectrum?

[EDM Entori]

evil spells are listed in their discriptors.. THOUGH, my mage did not use death magic for a long time.. vampiric touch would be hard to justify, but I mean, unless you emote some physical wound healing.. no one would know..

I'd say its up to you just check the descriptor.

ent

[Aodhan the Unusual]

Just keep in mind some spells WILL change your alignment. Maybe by only a point or two, but it IS possible.

[DM Grizwald]

also, try and keep everything IC. If your primary character is of good nature and against evil things, such as undead and vampires, i doubt he would use such a spell. For example my druid has never transformed into anything like a demon, construct or anything of the sort. Most of the shapes available are pretty much against any of the druidic beliefs.

[mastersenge]

Also have to remember that people with spellcraft skill will see what youre casting and if its an evil spell they will start thinking you are evil. It doesnt have to be summoning undead or demons. I was trying to pretend to be good for a short while and got called on using necromancy for using negative energy ray. Not saying you cant but people will call you on it. May as well use those evil spells anyway and Join Us! *evil laugh*

[Munroe]

Not all necromancy is evil. Vampiric Touch doesn't have the Evil descriptor, for instance. Most necromancy is perceived as evil though.

Channeling negative energy is evil (such as when rebuking undead) but spells are spells, and it falls to their descriptors to determine if they're evil. (We don't have an implementation of Rebuke Undead on FRC.)

Summoning undead is evil. Using Protection from Good is evil. Consorting with demons is evil. Eating babies is evil. Killing intelligent creatures senselessly is evil, whether it is done with a sword or with Searing Light.

The spell descriptors I refer to are their Player's Handbook (or other supplement) descriptors, which may not appear in-game.

[mastersenge]

*sighs* guess it could have been the eating babies that gave it away.

[Munroe]

Well, necromancy is often perceived as evil, even the necromancy spells that aren't evil. So if someone saw you using necromancy, even non-evil necromancy, and they assumed it was evil, and you are evil, then they made a good guess.

I can't find Negative Energy Ray in my books. Ray of Enfeeblement nor Ray of Exhaustion has an evil descriptor, nor does Negative Energy Aura or the Inflict spells.

Of course nobody ever complains about Undeath to Death but it is necromancy too.

[starofthewest]

Within the NWN engine there was not a lot of good aligned necromantic content included, which isn't exactly surprising given that there is little in either the 3rd edition or the 3.5 core rulebooks. In both "The Book of Exalted Deeds" and "Champions of Valor" (the FR Exalted supplement) there are numerous examples of necromantic spells with the good descriptor, as well as necromantic magic that is neither good nor evil but deals with positive energy, which can be just as harmful to most Prime creatures exposed to large amounts of it if harnessed in a damaging way.

This sort of thing can conceivably be brought into the server in specific instances with DM approval, if you make sure you check ahead of time and you do your homework. With DM MaO's approval, for instance, during the Ritual of Transformation event Vestele instigated, she reversed the spell "Slay Living" changing the descriptor from negative to positive energy to create an effect that gave an undead creature a save to avoid instant death (which for the purposes of the ritual the subject willingly failed).

[Pookey]

maston said:

*sighs* guess it could have been the eating babies that gave it away.

Well, we all know Lathander eats babies, so I wouldn't say that was a sure sign of evil.

[EDM Entori]

its all very true..

I perceived Necromancy as evil IC for a long time, then in the process of becoming a priest.. and a teacher, he found out necromancy wasn't so evil.

indeed it is a big responsibility.. decided what dies and what does, which is what one does when they cast finger of death. and Some characters will right you off on it too..

anyways its all IC and precepton IC. etc etc..

[Panros]

Hey, if an evil aligned wizard can use good spells and good aligned wizard can use evil spells. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

[kaltorac]

*points at Panros' response then Entori's* hm .... and yet everyone (elves that is) gives Celith the cold shoulder when he's never summoned undead and uses most other necromancy spells less than some goodly types .... hm


*Wanders off to roll up a neutral cleric of the Church of Zae* *Starts PGing so he can get Epic Cookies by the end of the month*

[HeatherRae]

torgeir said:

Hey, if an evil aligned wizard can use good spells and good aligned wizard can use evil spells. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

It doesn't work that way.

Evil characters can operate with an "ends justify the means" mentality. Good characters do not have that option.

[ancientempathy]

I find that if a good player were to use an "evil aligned spell", there must be one heck of a good RP reason to do so, rather than "Because I can/know the spell". Upon using it, I find there should be some action the character takes to make up for it with his or her Deity. Either by tithing or something else more suitable.

That is just my opinion though. True, perhaps certain spells shouldnt even be weilded by a good-aligned characters, unless they expect certain consequences to come from it, I suppose.

But still pertaining to spells being casted, what about certain spells being casted on good aligned characters that would normally "not be right."

I'll give a personal example.

While traveling with some companions one day, one of them had to cast the spell "Protection form alignment" on Randal - both from evil and from good. This was because the caster needed to use color spray as effectively as possible. Randal questioned the process of being "protected from good", but still allowed it. /I/ allowed it, really not knowing what to make of it.

Still, in the course of the RP I made Randal have a very empty feeling for a long time before he "adjusted" his thoughts/feelings to be able to 'sense' the good around him once again. I believe that was the best choice in that matter, but it can be subjective. I was told of instances where other paladins didn't mind it. To each their own I suppose.

Hopefully stating that example will help out some players who may have been in a similar situation.

Anyone have their takes on that situation too, though? Some feedback would be cool.

[HeatherRae]

ancientempathy said:

But still pertaining to spells being casted, what about certain spells being casted on good aligned characters that would normally "not be right."

I'll give a personal example.

While traveling with some companions one day, one of them had to cast the spell "Protection form alignment" on Randal - both from evil and from good. This was because the caster needed to use color spray as effectively as possible. Randal questioned the process of being "protected from good", but still allowed it. /I/ allowed it, really not knowing what to make of it.

Still, in the course of the RP I made Randal have a very empty feeling for a long time before he "adjusted" his thoughts/feelings to be able to 'sense' the good around him once again. I believe that was the best choice in that matter, but it can be subjective. I was told of instances where other paladins didn't mind it. To each their own I suppose.

Hopefully stating that example will help out some players who may have been in a similar situation.

Anyone have their takes on that situation too, though? Some feedback would be cool.

I had a question specifically about that for quite a while.

I was told in no uncertain terms that casting Protection from Good is an evil act, and thus my character will neither cast the spell nor allow it to be cast on her.

I think for a paladin, this would be even more important.

[ancientempathy]

heatherrae said:

ancientempathy said:

But still pertaining to spells being casted, what about certain spells being casted on good aligned characters that would normally "not be right."

I'll give a personal example.

While traveling with some companions one day, one of them had to cast the spell "Protection form alignment" on Randal - both from evil and from good. This was because the caster needed to use color spray as effectively as possible. Randal questioned the process of being "protected from good", but still allowed it. /I/ allowed it, really not knowing what to make of it.

Still, in the course of the RP I made Randal have a very empty feeling for a long time before he "adjusted" his thoughts/feelings to be able to 'sense' the good around him once again. I believe that was the best choice in that matter, but it can be subjective. I was told of instances where other paladins didn't mind it. To each their own I suppose.

Hopefully stating that example will help out some players who may have been in a similar situation.

Anyone have their takes on that situation too, though? Some feedback would be cool.

I had a question specifically about that for quite a while.

I was told in no uncertain terms that casting Protection from Good is an evil act, and thus my character will neither cast the spell nor allow it to be cast on her.

I think for a paladin, this would be even more important.

Said comment gets my approval. Any thoughts from anyone else?

[ancientempathy]

It does bring up a couple of questions.

Without any study in spellcraft, would a pc even realise IC that protection from evil had been cast on them?

Does the spell have any noticeable effect on the person it's cast on aside from the game engines little bubbles that would give them an IC reason to notice it was an evil spell?

My paladin hardly has any Spellcraft I believe. I feel it would be an "Insightful" thing for a paladin to recognize that,...hey, where is the good now?

There was a character I saw cast the spell "Aura of Spell Alignment", or whatever it's called. It's like "Protection from Alignment", but others around you can get protected as well, due to an aura.

There must have been an evil character near her, because he felt uncomfortable in the aura, then proceeded to step out of it. It was RPed well I thought.

[Mythinite]

An interesting thing to notice regarding spells with alignment descriptors and clerics is that a cleric simply cannot cast a spell that opposes their own or their deity's alignment. Hence it makes no sense that an evil cleric or a cleric of an evil deity can cast protection from evil, I'm sorry but that is a good aligned spell...
Perhaps spell scripts should include a check for alignment + caster class and prevent clerics from abusing this loophole in NWN? ;D

I'm sure there are many other spells with alignment descriptors, at least the auras of protection are aligned too.

On the other hand spells that deal with animating the dead should not be able to be cast by good clerics or clerics of good deities.

Spells such as Finger of Death, Slay Living and Harm are however not evil even though they are necromancy spells.

[EDM Neo]

I'm a little split on protection from good myself, really... although ICly, my character continues to use it regardless because he's more of the belief that the ends can justify the means, with few exceptions. If the teeny red lights keep blocking his spells, then as far as he's concerned, whether it's evil at all or not, it's not evil enough that the teeny red lights -won't- block his spells, and it's not really hurting anyone. And if they stop doing so, then he'll stop using it, both because it wouldn't help anymore, and because it's apparently evil to do so... so, that's my two cents on the matter. *Shrugs*

[starofthewest]

Because Protection from Evil and Protection from Good aren't recognized as two seperate spells by the NWN engine, it's impossible to distinguish between the two when it comes to descriptors... as for sparkly yellow or red lights affecting any character's judgement of such things, these effects are only present through the NWN engine and shouldn't be a part of the spell at all.

For the sake of the rules, though, and to be true to PnP, Protection from Good is by definition an evil aligned spell, which should give evil points any time it is used... if a good PC decides it is warranted and manages to justify its use to themselves, fine, but it would still inherently harm their soul and taint them (give evil points, much like undead animation spells).

A good character might decide in their own minds that the ends justify the means, but in the D&D universe, as stated in the Book of Exalted Deeds, such a view is ultimately misguided and any such action, regardless of the nobility of the motive or end desired, is a concession to evil and tips the greater balance slightly toward the forces of darkness.

Protection from Evil is an inherently good spell, but as alluded to by HeatherRae earlier, evil characters can indeed employ good means and spells to evil ends, without change to their alignment. An evil character who uses a protection from evil spell for an evil purpose (for instance, to ward themselves against a summoned fiend they are bargaining with or have summoned), wouldn't neccesarily recieve a shift of alignment, as their motives and desired ends corrupt the pure means they are using to see them realized.

The fact is, plain and simple, that when it comes to alignment, good characters are inherently more restricted than evil ones. This should be no different when it comes to the use of certain spells. Protection from good is not something a good character should sanction, least of all a paladin, and is something that should result in a shift of alignment, regardless of that particular PC's opinions, beliefs, justifications, or ignorance of the spell and its effects.

[DM Grizwald]

Wow well said

[EDM Neo]

Just on that note, if any DMs feel like dishing on some evil points for casting PfG, please feel welcome to... because ICly, until it actually stops working, alignment and the effect that casting the spell has on it is pretty tough to measure.

[mastersenge]

About the protection from evil its like star said you dont want to summon a balor or pit fiend without casting that first or it can be unhealthy. Also evil people have to worry about attacks from good and evil so its best to protect from everything. And like was said before evil people do whatever they want and cast whatever they want to get the job done its the good people that have to be picky and have all these moral issues.

[ancientempathy]

starofthewest said:

Because Protection from Evil and Protection from Good aren't recognized as two seperate spells by the NWN engine, it's impossible to distinguish between the two when it comes to descriptors... as for sparkly yellow or red lights affecting any character's judgement of such things, these effects are only present through the NWN engine and shouldn't be a part of the spell at all.

For the sake of the rules, though, and to be true to PnP, Protection from Good is by definition an evil aligned spell, which should give evil points any time it is used... if a good PC decides it is warranted and manages to justify its use to themselves, fine, but it would still inherently harm their soul and taint them (give evil points, much like undead animation spells).

A good character might decide in their own minds that the ends justify the means, but in the D&D universe, as stated in the Book of Exalted Deeds, such a view is ultimately misguided and any such action, regardless of the nobility of the motive or end desired, is a concession to evil and tips the greater balance slightly toward the forces of darkness.

Protection from Evil is an inherently good spell, but as alluded to by HeatherRae earlier, evil characters can indeed employ good means and spells to evil ends, without change to their alignment. An evil character who uses a protection from evil spell for an evil purpose (for instance, to ward themselves against a summoned fiend they are bargaining with or have summoned), wouldn't neccesarily recieve a shift of alignment, as their motives and desired ends corrupt the pure means they are using to see them realized.

The fact is, plain and simple, that when it comes to alignment, good characters are inherently more restricted than evil ones. This should be no different when it comes to the use of certain spells. Protection from good is not something a good character should sanction, least of all a paladin, and is something that should result in a shift of alignment, regardless of that particular PC's opinions, beliefs, justifications, or ignorance of the spell and its effects.

/Thank/ you.

[ancientempathy]

Star, now some people may be thinking

What of recieving "buff" spells from clerics of an evil deity, but when the cleric themself is of some neutral alignment?

[starofthewest]

That's a good question, and one that takes a little more thinking about, but in a lot of ways is simpler to answer. In terms of game mechanics, spells cast by the cleric of an evil deity, if that cleric is of evil alignment or not, are not inherently evil because of the "source" from which they stem. By the same token, spells cast by the cleric of a good deity, if that cleric is good or not, are not inherently good. It is simply channeling of power to achieve a certain affect, which, with the exceptions of spells with the evil or good descriptor, are unaligned.

Now, in terms of general principle, that's a whole different ballpark... if your character disagrees with recieving spells from the cleric of a dark deity or refuses to cast spells on an evil aligned character for a similar reason, that's their choice, obviously, but a paladin who, in ignorance, recieves the blessings (like, say, the bless spell) from a cleric of Bane wouldn't have to atone or recieve evil alignment points. Of course, it would have to be in ignorance, since a paladin's vows prevent them from knowingly travelling or associating with evil characters.

But the bottom line is - if there's no descriptor in the game engine (with the exception of protection from alignment and aura against alignment spells, as mentioned above) MAGIC IS UNALIGNED. Can magic be used to commit evil acts? Yes, just as a sword can, and magic used to do evil should result in alignment change. But magic is no more evil, in most cases, than any other tool. In general, the reason a spell is assigned the evil descriptor, according to the book of Vile Darkness, is if it causes damage or harm to a creature' (including the casters own) soul, deals with the creation of undead, etc. What the evil descriptor means for a spell is that NO MATTER WHAT the purpose it is used for, or the reason it is used, it is ALWAYS evil.

[ancientempathy]

starofthewest said:

That's a good question, and one that takes a little more thinking about, but in a lot of ways is simpler to answer. In terms of game mechanics, spells cast by the cleric of an evil deity, if that cleric is of evil alignment or not, are not inherently evil because of the "source" from which they stem. By the same token, spells cast by the cleric of a good deity, if that cleric is good or not, are not inherently good. It is simply channeling of power to achieve a certain affect, which, with the exceptions of spells with the evil or good descriptor, are unaligned.

Now, in terms of general principle, that's a whole different ballpark... if your character disagrees with recieving spells from the cleric of a dark deity or refuses to cast spells on an evil aligned character for a similar reason, that's their choice, obviously, but a paladin who, in ignorance, recieves the blessings (like, say, the bless spell) from a cleric of Bane wouldn't have to atone or recieve evil alignment points. Of course, it would have to be in ignorance, since a paladin's vows prevent them from knowingly travelling or associating with evil characters.

But the bottom line is - if there's no descriptor in the game engine (with the exception of protection from alignment and aura against alignment spells, as mentioned above) MAGIC IS UNALIGNED. Can magic be used to commit evil acts? Yes, just as a sword can, and magic used to do evil should result in alignment change. But magic is no more evil, in most cases, than any other tool. In general, the reason a spell is assigned the evil descriptor, according to the book of Vile Darkness, is if it causes damage or harm to a creature' (including the casters own) soul, deals with the creation of undead, etc. What the evil descriptor means for a spell is that NO MATTER WHAT the purpose it is used for, or the reason it is used, it is ALWAYS evil.

Thank you again =)

[Munroe]

I agree with everything you said except this:

starofthewest said:

But the bottom line is - if there's no descriptor in the game engine (with the exception of protection from alignment and aura against alignment spells, as mentioned above) MAGIC IS UNALIGNED.

The Player's Handbook (or the supplement where the spell originates) is the arbiter of a spell's alignment, not the NWN engine.

Other than that, you hit the nail on the head.

Edit: For those without the Player's Handbook, www.d20srd.org is a good reference that usually gets it right. (They used to have the rules for the Shadowdancer's Summon Shadow ability wrong but it appears they corrected that error.)

[EDM Entori]

I just don't know how to view it.. like neo said..


wizards would veiw it as a very basic spell to block his own spells on his companions. Confusion and hold person spells are instantly blocked by such if cast by a goodly source, and frankly a goodly person may fall from grace and start casting on me and mine.

So before you start dishing out evil points maybe if the person is neutral? than he should stay that way if using both?.. thats up to DM's

as for the source, if it says its evil, well its not listed as it in NWN so which do we follow. I know source is the "guide line" but there are plenty not to source in FRC, even if most is. We don't play and exact replica. I've used it on very little occasion.. But I'd still like to know.

and should arcane, as magical study be treated different then divine?.. would a casting of a studied spell through an arcane way to accomplish a goodly act evil?..

compared to a clerical as the RP is that the spell is gifted by the gods and well, lathander better have a damn good reason for granting that one..

Just curious I'm not familiar with the exhaulted deeds book, beside what star has told me..

feel free to reply I'm just confused LOL

ent