|
Post by EDM Neo on Mar 2, 2007 12:13:21 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by EDM Neo on Mar 2, 2007 13:25:03 GMT -5
One of the problems with DnD in general is that alignment (or in this case, evil) is not subjective. There's good, there's evil, and there's neutral. That's that. Let's say you have a nation where slavery is commonplace. Even if it's acceptable by the community as normal, and if no one sees it as a moral wrong, it's still considered evil. That's why spells like protection from alignment are possible. Alignment, in DnD, is rigid, regardless of how it is perceived.
|
|
Kharn597
Old School
![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star_green.png) ![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star_green.png)
PCs: Tenchi Yamato; Katha; Danny Tanneseph
Posts: 461
|
Post by Kharn597 on Mar 2, 2007 13:39:36 GMT -5
Good place to read about what is evil in forgotten realms is the Champions of Ruins. Talks aout crazy evil, those that do what they call good by any means to acheve the good end(group of elves exterminating humans to retake elven lands), to lust for power and wealth, to just devotion to taking pleasure in the pains of others.
|
|
|
Post by moulinous on Mar 2, 2007 14:38:37 GMT -5
if anyone wants to borrow via file swapping i have the book titled Vile Deeds by FRC that goes into great detail about being evil and supplys some valuable insight...i also have the book Exalted Deeds which is good as well for you do gooders...
|
|
|
Post by soulfien on Mar 2, 2007 17:56:17 GMT -5
Very good read.
The part about "arcane healing" was good. That's pretty much done in the absence of divine healing. Such as in the Dragonlance setting where the Gods have essentially turned their backs on mankind leaving all the Clerics powerless.
Neutrality.... this one is a point of confusion for many as I see it. Typically, a neutral PC can perform countless "good" acts that will typically go unnoticed by the DM. On the flip side, the first time that Neutral PC casts a spell sunnoning up an Undead ally, the DM smacks him with a few evil points and a warning of an alignment change if he persists. Just remember- Neutrality runs between good and evil and as such a true neutral character must perform acts of both good and evil based on each situation he's faced with. Each act must be taken on a case by case basis and that makes it very difficult, if not (at times) more difficult than Lawful Good, to play properly.
|
|
|
Post by Thanatos on Mar 2, 2007 21:49:32 GMT -5
Sorry, I think I'm a little confused here... Is this topic about necromancy, or about evil? I'm going to pretend it's what the title says it's about just so that I can say this: My gripe with necromancy/necromancers has nothing to do with whether or not it is or is not evil. My gripe's always been with people's attitudes towards necromancy/necromancers. Something that has utterly baffled me and my character since playing. You have a school of magic that's devoted to the blackest of the black arts (litteraly, death magic) and no one so much as blinks their eye when presented with it? Here, allow me to emphasise my point through a hypothetical conversation. Necromancer: "*heavy breathing* My name... Is Mortis... I am *hiss* a necromancer... [insert disturbing creepiness]" Adventurer: "Cool! Lets go kill something!" Granted, it's perfectly possible that necromancers aren't all evil (just creepy). I could even conceive character concepts of necromancers who take their path out of a genuine desire to learn. This, I do not have any argument with. What I do like to complain about is our readiness to assume that this high medieval society is about as accepting and open-minded as us good old folk from the 21st century. I mean, hell, if I was good old Mortis up there, I'd be offended at not being a complete outcast! ... Does anyone kind of see my point here? If not, I'm really sorry, I'm tired at the moment and will try to clarify when I am more sound of mind. I guess what I'm saying is... Would it kill you guys to pretend to be worried about necromancy? ![:)](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/smiley.png)
|
|
|
Post by Munroe on Mar 2, 2007 23:27:57 GMT -5
Hey, I agree with you. I'd love to run some necromancers out of town on a rail.
I don't necessarily agree with the "high medieval society" comment though, Faerun is not Earth and comparing it to any earth timeframe misrepresents it. What we generally consider earth medieval was governed by a prevalent monotheistic church dominance of culture and a fear of the diabolic influences on the secular world. By medieval European standards, bards would be evil because they encourage godlessness in the world.
Certainly in some instances comparing Faerun to medieval Earth could be fitting (particularly regarding the degree of education of commoners), but a lot of the cultural comparisons fall flat because of the monotheism vs. polytheism.
|
|
|
Post by Thanatos on Mar 3, 2007 3:14:01 GMT -5
Ah! Very true points and the comment is withdrawn, altered, and reposted for user-friendly convenience! ;D What I really meant to say was not that 'Faerun is like high medieval Europe'. In fact, it is most likely far more accepting (religiously, anyhow). But I do think that some things would continue to hold true despite the differences between Faerun and high medieval Europe. Necromancy should be greatly feared and mistrusted. Even if there is no forced fear upon the population of Faerun, there is a very strong/real belief of there being several layers of Hells, and on top of that, an infinte demon-infested Abyss. Who needs monotheistic oppression when you have demons blinking in and out of Isinhold and Redmist? Furthermore, as DM Munroe said, the general population should be very uneducated. Even though we know OOC that necromancers have next to nothing to do with it... Why aren't we pointing fingers more? We're uneducated and we're very frightened, and they make great scapegoats (I refer you to mention of overall creepiness). This may sound strange from the guy who has a word for death as his user name, but people fear death in polytheism. They should fear death magic no less. The lack of a single controlling church wouldn't make the population go on witch-hunts and freak out about a spell being cast in the open, true. However, we still shouldn't like the idea of being messed around with after we die by anything short of divine will (i.e. handy-dandy clerics). PS: Don't mean to give all you necromancer-players a hard time. Just venting over the whole "You're crazy for not approving of necromancy"-thing. ![:P](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/tongue.png)
|
|
|
Post by catmage on Mar 3, 2007 4:19:33 GMT -5
Well, with regards to death magic, that also means that illusionists should be feared, because they're the group with Weird, Phantasmal Killer, and a few other rather dangerous kill spells, at least in PnP. However, Necromancy is for the most part creepy as hell. Even spells that don't kill people or spells that raise them as undead still deal with negative emotions(Fear, Scare) and Negative energy(Neg En Ray, Neg En Burst), both of which are not so good. Negative energy manipulation is never a good act, but it can be used with good intentions, and thus neutral alignment characters can use such magic. A good aligned necromancer is certainly allowable, but not entirely plausible, unless it's one who had a big ol' change of heart later in life, since necromancy spells with the good descriptor are few and far between, and no necromancy spell in NWN to my knowledge has the good descriptor. A good aligned specialist necromancer would have to give up many of his spell options, or he would eventually lose the good alignment and take up a neutral one. And finally, necromancers are going to be feared by most, and those that openly announce their practices, even if they are a saint among saints, should expect hatred and even violence being brought to them, same as a tiefling cleric of Ilmater or a drow who worships what's her name.
My basis for this reasoning is the source book Heroes of Horror, with the class Dread Necromancer influencing my feelings, and chapter six of the Book of Vile Darkness, with it's mention spells which call upon evil energies or spells that cause undue suffering and or negative emotions as being evil in nature, as well as chapter one of the good Bad Book, which states "Even if they are commanded to do something good, undead invariably bring negative energy into the world, which makes it a darker and more evil place", and lastly, Libris Mortis, which gives a possible motive and origins of undead stemming from a life draining greed of the Negative Energy Plane, which implies some small amount of malevolent self awareness on the plane's part.
|
|
|
Post by Munroe on Mar 3, 2007 7:14:33 GMT -5
and lastly, Libris Mortis, which gives a possible motive and origins of undead stemming from a life draining greed of the Negative Energy Plane, which implies some small amount of malevolent self awareness on the plane's part. Anything proposed in Libris Mortis tends to come across to me as a variant rule (even though I love the half-vampire template there). Libris Mortis also talks about relaxing the rules on undead alignments to run some of the game options presented therein. I don't see all necromancy as evil. Granted, the most widely known necromantic spells, such as animate dead and create undead and most others having to do with undead, are evil, but most of the ones not dealing directly with undead are neutral. The way I see it, if it has an evil descriptor, treat it as such, but a good cleric can use inflict spells (which don't have the evil descriptor) if s/he prepares them in advance. The bane of undead everywhere, Undeath to Death, is also a necromancy spell. That shouldn't change the fact that an arcane necromancer, that is a wizard specializing in necromancy, is specializing in a field of study that is very morbid and creepy. Evil clerics make better necromancers than arcane necromancers anyway, at least they would if they could rebuke/command undead. Anyway, at best a necromancer might barely be tolerated, but the use of occasional necromancy by a more general practicioner would not be so ill-received, at least to my mind.
|
|
|
Post by soulfien on Mar 3, 2007 18:45:35 GMT -5
it's not just limited to necromancers. All wizards have access to necromantic spells regardless if they specialize in it or not- save for illusionists which are prohibited from learning necromancy (I could be mistaken, but I think it's illusion). Now, assuredly, those who specialize in Necromancy are indeed capable of an even darker form of the field and they may even aquire that weird raspy and evil sounding voice that for some reason evil people tend to get. But, when a typical good aligned wizard suddenly rips out the soul of a giant just before it lands that killing blow on the prone paladin, that's necromancy at its finest. Of course, don't get me wrong- it's perfectly reasonable to see Sharita... er.. .I mean the paladin stand up, brush herself... err themself off and accuse the wizard who just saved they're life of being a dark and evil force that needs to be smited! *Paladin skewers the suprised wizard* ![;)](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/wink.png) Anyway, slights against paladins aside, there are some people who view, and correctly, that killing is killing- whether you pummel them painfully to death with 20 missils, burn them to death with a couple of cumbust spells mixed with a lingering acid effect, or painlessly seperate their souls from their living bodies. Most adventurers are killers. It's usually only the most zealous that still insist that there's a certain acceptable way to go about it. Okay, opinion over ![:)](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/smiley.png)
|
|
|
Post by eraldur on Mar 10, 2007 9:45:58 GMT -5
Necromancy
Necromancy spells hold dominion over life and death. Their effects can drain the stamina out of an opponent's body, exert control over the undead, or instill paralyzing fear in a creature's mind. Specialists in this school call themselves necromancers, and they subscribe to the philosophy of waste not, want not. Detractors of the school condemn necromancers' practices as abhorrent and disrespectful to the dead, but necromancers defend their art on the premise that the dead care very little for their bodies, especially if they can be put to good use. Controlling such bodies, however, is secondary to controlling life.
To a necromancer, magic is based on the idea that life is an essential element in theuniverse—one that can be controlled and manipulated just as matter and energy can be. Necromancers believe that they hold the reins of life by surrounding themselves with undead creatures. People who challenge the necessity of this school claim that necromancy weakens the barriers between the dead and living realms, causing the two to encroach upon one another more each day.
Philosophically, necromancy is opposed to the school of enchantment, which claims supremacy over the mind. Necromancy trumps the mind by claiming dominion over life. Necromancy also finds little in common with conjuration; while conjurers must create their own power by summoning and the like, necromancers work with whatever is on hand at the time.
Personality: Necromancers are introspective characters with a pragmatic approach to death. As a necromancer, you might exhibit any or all of the following personality traits.
-You are heedless and insensitive toward the emotions of people about death. -You are hopeful and impatient as people die, seeing their bodies as useful material for your spells. -You are obsessed with your own mortality and crave immunity from death. -You brood instead of discussing or sharing your thoughts.
Prohibited Schools: As a necromancer, you are inclined to make illusion one of your prohibited schools, valuing permanent spell effects over mental tricks that can be disbelieved away. Conjuration largely serves a redundant purpose to necromancers, who call upon legions of undead to serve their needs rather than summoned monsters. Enchantment is also a good choice for a prohibited school, since necromancers rarely have any need for living servants.
Sources: The Complete mage
-----
As for the Topic at hand, whether Necromacy is Evil, let me quote you some sources from the Book of Vile Darkness that has repertoried and gone in details as to what can be considered as being "Evil Acts".
Evil Acts
-Lying -Cheating -Theft -Murder -Vengeance -Worshiping evil gods and demons -Animating dead or creating undead -Casting Evil spells -Damning or harming souls -Consorting with fiends -Creating evil creatures -Using others for personal gain -Greed -Bullying and cowing innocents -Bringing dispear -Tempting others
|
|
|
Post by Munroe on Mar 10, 2007 19:52:27 GMT -5
As for the Topic at hand, whether Necromacy is Evil, let me quote you some sources from the Book of Vile Darkness that has repertoried and gone in details as to what can be considered as being "Evil Acts". Evil Acts-Lying -Cheating -Theft -Murder -Vengeance -Worshiping evil gods and demons -Animating dead or creating undead -Casting Evil spells-Damning or harming souls -Consorting with fiends -Creating evil creatures -Using others for personal gain -Greed -Bullying and cowing innocents -Bringing dispear -Tempting others Right, animating dead or creating undead is an evil act, and both of those spells contain evil descriptors. There are also other evil necromancy spells that don't deal directly with creating undead. However, quite a few necromancy spells do not contain an Evil descriptor so aren't evil spells. These non-evil necromancy spells, being necromancy spells, are prone to use by necromancers, who are probably evil, but the spells are not evil themselves.
|
|
|
Post by marquardt on Mar 21, 2007 8:20:39 GMT -5
My gripe is the double standard with Necromancy. For example, I was killed the other day for having a necromantic. I was deemed evil for using necromancy. The killers spell of choice? Finger Of Death, a necromancy spell that was spammed on me multiple times until successful. Incidently they had double spell focus in necromancy, which confused me.
Unfortunately I feel that people here are indocrinated in to thinking that it's their duty to stop anyone with undead, but they don't apply the same strict principles to themselves. In every forgotten realms book I've read, I've never read anything about Elminster or any other good aligned wizard using death magic.
I, for one, think that deeming certain necromancy spells okay and others not okay is a thinly veiled attempt by people to have their cake and eat it too, being able to condemn players and still access the higher power necromancy spells. Very frustrating.
|
|
Myth
Old School
![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star_green.png) ![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star_green.png)
Retired FRC DM
The Myth
Posts: 686
|
Post by Myth on Mar 21, 2007 8:33:56 GMT -5
My gripe is the double standard with Necromancy. For example, I was killed the other day for having a necromantic. I was deemed evil for using necromancy. The killers spell of choice? Finger Of Death, a necromancy spell that was spammed on me multiple times until successful. Incidently they had double spell focus in necromancy, which confused me. Unfortunately I feel that people here are indocrinated in to thinking that it's their duty to stop anyone with undead, but they don't apply the same strict principles to themselves. In every forgotten realms book I've read, I've never read anything about Elminster or any other good aligned wizard using death magic. I, for one, think that deeming certain necromancy spells okay and others not okay is a thinly veiled attempt by people to have their cake and eat it too, being able to condemn players and still access the higher power necromancy spells. Very frustrating. My two cents. As Munroe has noted and can easily be found, All spells that raise undead and those with negative energy have 'evil' descriptors. Finger of Death doesn't have evil descriptor. Reminding it so that maybe it can help this discussion.
|
|
|
Post by tleilaxughola on Mar 21, 2007 9:57:08 GMT -5
My two cents. As Munroe has noted and can easily be found, All spells that raise undead and those with negative energy have 'evil' descriptors. Finger of Death doesn't have evil descriptor. Reminding it so that maybe it can help this discussion. How is Finger of Death not negative energy? Or evil? Negative Energy Burst has nothing on this bad boy. Also, just to split a hair, Theft is not an evil act, not innately...it's a Chaotic act. Robin Hood and Aladdin were not evil, nor engaged in evil acts...just chaotic as all hell.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 21, 2007 10:03:15 GMT -5
My two cents. As Munroe has noted and can easily be found, All spells that raise undead and those with negative energy have 'evil' descriptors. Finger of Death doesn't have evil descriptor. Reminding it so that maybe it can help this discussion. All spells that raise undead do have 'evil' descriptors, but not all spells that use negative energy do (this is also easily found above in thread). While FoD does not have an evil descriptor, it is necromancy ... so if the individual actaully said "You must die because you practice necromancy" and then used necromancy to kill them, it is quite hypocritical. The reason should be that they raised undead ... not that they cast a spell from the necromancy school. Unfortunately, when most people think of necromancy they immediately think of raising the dead ... so it's also quite possible the attacker meant they were killing them for raising the dead, rather than casting a spell from the necromancy school. I do think it's kind of silly that some uses of negative energy are tagged with evil descriptors and some are not. It would be a lot simpler & self consistent if all spells involving drawing negative energy to the prime material plame were tagged with evil descriptors (and you can make an argument for this, though the rules don't explicitly state it ... see the section on clerics turning or controlling undead and what it says about channeling negative and positive energy).
|
|
|
Post by marquardt on Mar 21, 2007 10:05:06 GMT -5
Not sure who Munroe is or why his word is worth more than anyone elses.
Basically what you're saying is if Finger Of Death used negative energy to sap the victims total hp's out instead of just automatically killing them that it'd be a "negative energy spell" and thus, since it fits under the appropriate descriptor, becomes evil? Either way you look at it, the spell uses black magic to instantly kill someone by tapping in to their life force.
Incidently, I find it quite interesting how it's the higher level wizards who use FOD regularly who are the ones who rush to defend it's use here. Almost as though they have a vested interest in continuing to use the spell without consequence.
|
|
Myth
Old School
![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star_green.png) ![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star_green.png)
Retired FRC DM
The Myth
Posts: 686
|
Post by Myth on Mar 21, 2007 10:14:04 GMT -5
To clarify I didn't say that FoD isn't necromancy. I said it doesn't have an evil descriptor. As far as I'm concerned my char has no problem with necromancy, he does have a problem with raising undead due to his own reasons.
As far as evil goes, anyone can check the spell descriptors either in NWN or Player's Handbook to find out which spells are considered INHERENTLY evil and which aren't.
What I'm saying however has already been mentioned in previous posts, and as said can all be found in PhB regarding spell descriptors, so except the "Hate necromancy but I use it" part, I can't see anything else that is not clear.
P.S. I really don't like the tone of the "folks who use it defend it argument"... Forums are for constructive and not bitter comments and I can see how this can go the wrong way. We're here to talk, not point fingers I think.
|
|
|
Post by HeatherRae on Mar 21, 2007 10:19:29 GMT -5
Not sure who Munroe is or why his word is worth more than anyone elses. Basically what you're saying is if Finger Of Death used negative energy to sap the victims total hp's out instead of just automatically killing them that it'd be a "negative energy spell" and thus, since it fits under the appropriate descriptor, becomes evil? Either way you look at it, the spell uses black magic to instantly kill someone by tapping in to their life force. Incidently, I find it quite interesting how it's the higher level wizards who use FOD regularly who are the ones who rush to defend it's use here. Almost as though they have a vested interest in continuing to use the spell without consequence. Um, yeah, I don't play a wizard. Finger of Death does not have the Evil descriptor. Therefore, by the mechanics of D&D - whether or not you like said mechanics - it is not inherantly evil. That is to say, it is only as evil as the intentions of the caster. I know that my character (a cleric, incidentally) would be very inclined to set someone on fire if she saw them raising undead. This may just be because she's mean (no one laugh!), or it may be that pesky little thing called "Dawnbringer" that's attached to her name. She generally doesn't like Necromancy either, but has relaxed her intense dislike because there is one necromantic spell she regularly uses - that being Death Ward. Oh, and incidentally, "Munroe" would be the DM Munroe, who gets to make rules calls like these.
|
|
tbone
New Member
If Drow+Spider=Drider => Spider + Orc = Spork?
Posts: 46
|
Post by tbone on Mar 21, 2007 10:57:41 GMT -5
Just to clarify, as it was brought up earlier, there IS written evidence of Elminster using Finger of Death. It's in one of the Ed Greenwood Elminster series books, "The Temptation of Elminster", I believe, (and bear in mind it's been a few years since I've read it, so I'm a little sketchy on the details.) Ol' E is serving as a court wizard or some such at the time and uses FoD to blow away some treacherous courtier in front of the gods and everybody, right in the middle of court. (Note, the text doesn't specifically say "Elminster casts Finger of Death," but the way the spell is described an eerily glowing hand, pointing toward the traitorous target, causing him to die instantly upon contact, I do not know of any other spell it could possibly be.)
Now, just because it appears in that book (which, I should add, wasn't a particularly compelling read, but I digress) isn't to say that it should be law. But, since the book was written (albeit disappointingly, imho) by one of the Co-Creators of the Forgotten Realms setting, it does lend canonical credence to the claim that "Good" wizards can use FoD... cause if 'E isn't a "Good" Wizard in FR, pretty much nobody is.
|
|
|
Post by tleilaxughola on Mar 21, 2007 11:19:24 GMT -5
The best case for negative neutrality comes from the fact that it's one of the elemental planes, no more evil than Fire. Positive energy can destroy you just as quickly.
The only real case for negative evilness is that negative energy attacks the soul directly, which is kind of nasty. This raises the question of culture...how does your culture view the soul? Holy and sacrosanct, or largely irrelevant? Once the question becomes cultural, I don't think it can be called "inate".
The undead are one application of negative energy out of many. Anything having to do with raising undead is using a neutral force for a very evil purpose. Raising an undead is a monstrous violation of that being, there's simply no loopholes there, but it's not the negative energy's fault that you're nasty.
|
|
|
Post by Munroe on Mar 21, 2007 18:01:08 GMT -5
My gripe is the double standard with Necromancy. For example, I was killed the other day for having a necromantic. I was deemed evil for using necromancy. The killers spell of choice? Finger Of Death, a necromancy spell that was spammed on me multiple times until successful. Incidently they had double spell focus in necromancy, which confused me. Unfortunately I feel that people here are indocrinated in to thinking that it's their duty to stop anyone with undead, but they don't apply the same strict principles to themselves. In every forgotten realms book I've read, I've never read anything about Elminster or any other good aligned wizard using death magic. I, for one, think that deeming certain necromancy spells okay and others not okay is a thinly veiled attempt by people to have their cake and eat it too, being able to condemn players and still access the higher power necromancy spells. Very frustrating. My two cents. As Munroe has noted and can easily be found, All spells that raise undead and those with negative energy have 'evil' descriptors. Finger of Death doesn't have evil descriptor. Reminding it so that maybe it can help this discussion. I never said anything about negative energy spells being evil. I said... In fact, most spells that use negative energy are not evil spells. The whole set of cleric Inflict Wounds spells are not evil, for instance. They can be cast spontaneously be evil clerics, but because they do not contain an Evil descriptor they can still be prepared by good clerics. Harm, Energy Drain, and Enervation are also negative energy spells that do not contain the Evil Descriptor. Does not having an Evil Descriptor mean these spells are admirable or good? No, it certainly doesn't, they're still all very dangerous. It just means that they're only as evil as how they're used. A Blade Barrier, FlameStrike, or Hammer of the Gods can be used for murder as easily as an Inflict Serious Wounds or Negative Energy Burst. Necromancy is considered evil because of its ties with the undead, and as it regards the undead, it is evil. However, necromancy itself is more than just the means to manipulate the undead, and not all of the magic that comprises necromancy is evil. Negative Energy is elemental and as such it is neutral. Being neutral does not mean something is required to be non-harmful though. Fire burns, water drowns, earth suffocates... air? The point is, being non-evil does not necessarily mean harmless.
|
|
Myth
Old School
![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star_green.png) ![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star_green.png)
Retired FRC DM
The Myth
Posts: 686
|
Post by Myth on Mar 21, 2007 18:23:12 GMT -5
I never said anything about negative energy spells being evil. I said... In fact, most spells that use negative energy are not evil spells. The whole set of cleric Inflict Wounds spells are not evil, for instance. They can be cast spontaneously be evil clerics, but because they do not contain an Evil descriptor they can still be prepared by good clerics. Harm, Energy Drain, and Enervation are also negative energy spells that do not contain the Evil Descriptor. Does not having an Evil Descriptor mean these spells are admirable or good? No, it certainly doesn't, they're still all very dangerous. It just means that they're only as evil as how they're used. A Blade Barrier, FlameStrike, or Hammer of the Gods can be used for murder as easily as an Inflict Serious Wounds or Negative Energy Burst. Necromancy is considered evil because of its ties with the undead, and as it regards the undead, it is evil. However, necromancy itself is more than just the means to manipulate the undead, and not all of the magic that comprises necromancy is evil. Negative Energy is elemental and as such it is neutral. Being neutral does not mean something is required to be non-harmful though. Fire burns, water drowns, earth suffocates... air? The point is, being non-evil does not necessarily mean harmless. Just to clarify what I meant is that you've pointed out in previous posts that there are descriptors in spells in PhB and in NWN as well that define spells as evil or not evil. I didn't mean that you said neg. energy spells are evil, sorry if I misphrased it. ![:-/](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/undecided.png)
|
|
|
Post by Munroe on Mar 21, 2007 19:17:43 GMT -5
I'm not worried about it, I just like to be clear on what I say.
|
|