Remove alignment shifts from spells

[Mallore]

Removed at the request of user.

[metaquad4]

What about other spells, Mallore? Is chaotic evil the only alignment people can shift to (this is the only alignment BG mechanics can shift you towards)? No? I thought not.

You can't include one street, without including them all. That isn't a fair ruleset in the slightest. It is a road to a shallow system, however.

Lawful, Good, and pure (meaning Lawful/Chaotic without evil or good and good/evil without lawful/chaotic) also need representation. There are spells we have with those descriptors already, they just need to be changed (a lovely example is protection from evil and protection from good, which carry the good and evil descriptor respectively).

All need to be changed to represent the alignment spectrum, or none need to have it automated.

In addition, spells are not the only thing that can shift alignment. Actions can. Since text is very hard to script, quests should shift alignment as well (if spells can). Since, quests are easy actions to dictate. Else-wise, the alignment system is skewed against none-spellcasters.

[chad878262]

I'm pretty sure in D&D a 'True Neutral' Character, while trying to maintain 'balance' might switch sides once or more times within a conflict. By the same token, might use evil spell to protect nature from a 'greater evil' or might use a 'good spell' for less than good purpose. There just really isn't a script that can think up all the RP a player may engage in. As I said, first time I saw the evil points I thought it was cool, but as MQ stated you can't have it just go one-way and you can't account for all situations. The issue is not that there are a few things that give chaotic and/or evil points, the real issue is that from an RP perspective it's a very incomplete system.

[Mallore]

Sadly yes, to the two above.


Only evil spells should have the corrupter mechanic. This does not make the game flat or dull, it enforces Role Play, it hampers power gaming and rewards making correct non power decisions.

If you want abyssal might, it corrupts. You can be the most neutral guy in the world, but using that power corrupts you from within slowly. You start to doubt, question and take more dark power. It is corrupting, evil corrupts. This is a wonderful mechanic we should be embracing and growing.

This is not about fair, this is about role play, this is about growth and confirming gaming themes.

Quests do not corrupt like magic for the very essence of magic goes deep into a person and opens them to greater faster power then beaver pelts. Once again, the idea that oh I cast a good spell now should counter that evil spell, is actually evil thought! there is no neutral in that, there is no good, it is justification which in itself is the path to darkness in Dungeons and Dragons.

This mechanic is completely avoidable, just do not use the spell.

We should seriously ask ourselves about the rp issues of characters using these dark powers and why are they not evil, and in the case of long term epics who are netrual, why have they not fallen to evil yet?

Perhaps a conversation should be started on evil spell casting and the affects it should have on roleplay? This mechanic is wonderful and perhaps should be expanded to a list of spells. We have to remember Faerun is not like our world. Evil is Black and White.

[Mallore]

Thought... though slightly off topic but maybe a appropriate given the issue.

Instead of a constant 1 point bleed when you cast this spell, because we want to run around and sling our magic, it is fun! Why doesn't the spell just auto give a group of evil points to your alignment on choosing? Such as something 5, or 10 on epic spells.

I mean it seams fair, you chose to explore a dark corrupting, evil power. RP consequences. Your character spent time or made a deal to get that power. It is evil, you opened yourself to it and its tearing at your soul, so slowly. This is how evil works.

Fear falling as you should? dont take the spell/feat or other. Took to many and your getting close to a fall or alignment shift you may not like.. sure dont take it.

And it does go both ways. but redemption needs to be played out over long rp. Could be awesome to see players trying to redeem a fallen brother, the rp opportunities for good priests, heroes, clerics, paladins is great here.

grows rp, doesnt hamper. promotes rp, breaks the laisfez faire.

just additional thoughts and sudden inspiration I wanted to jot down.

[chad878262]

Well, I think there is a few issues... Some may not have an issue with 'evil' points, but may not want 'chaotic' points (or the other way around). I think someone pointed to Blood Magic as an example as the RP didn't fit 'chaotic' so much as it did 'evil' Avasculate has the 'evil' descriptor in some d&d sources in a quick google search, but nothing about it denotes 'chaos'... Likewise for Abyssal Might, there is nothing in the description denoting it being 'chaotic', but it does say 'evil'. (although 'abyssal' makes me think it could be both chaotic and evil to cast, the description only calls out 'evil')

Point being everything that is 'bad' gives 'chaotic' and 'evil' points... Not everything evil is chaotic and vice versa. I think the issue is these few spells are somehow chaotic and evil, even though there is nothing to denote them as such in pnp. On top of this, as was stated, it is simply inconsistent with anything else on the server in regards to how alignment shifts are handled.

[metaquad4]

Do you have a source for all of that, Mallore? Where is this "evil spells only have a corrupter mechanic" coming from? Magic isn't a corrupting ability in Forgotten Realms, it is natural and ever-present force.

One sided alignment shifts do, however, make the game one dimensional and dull. Would you feel alright if the DMs decided one day to only give chaotic evil alignment shifts, and not give out any others for anything? No. That would be downright silly. That is where the mechanics are, right now. The current mechanics are the automated version of that DM who only gives 1 kind of alignment shift.

Actions in D&D (this is backed up by the rules of the game itself) do change your alignment. Your alignment isn't a tangible thing, persay (it is, and it isn't). It is a record of EVERYTHING a character has done in their past, and what the final culmination is (the final culmination, being your alignment). All past actions, be it casting a horrific spell or saving a family at the risk of one's own life are part of that. These are all supported by the rules we (are supposed to be) play(ing) with.

The whole idea of "I'll counteract my good spell and cast an evil spell" is a metagamey thought and shouldn't be a factor in what you are debating. That is the player talking, not the character. Hence, that action doesn't bear into the IC world. An evil character (generally) wouldn't cast a good spell, lest they succumb to good. Just as a good character (generally) wouldn't cast an evil spell, lest they succumb to evil. This is further re enforced by the fact that clerics of evil cannot cast good spells, and clerics of good cannot cast evil spells (in the raw).

So, yes. All paths must be represented or the mechanics are faulty (in this case, it is the latter).

Heck, in the raw, none of this even happens (most of the time, as will be noted below!). Another argument for abolishing alignment changes due to spells.

From the Source Reference Document for 3.5's ruleset.

Hidden: show

"Descriptor:

Appearing on the same line as the school and subschool, when applicable, is a descriptor that further categorizes the spell in some way. Some spells have more than one descriptor.

The descriptors are acid, air, chaotic, cold, darkness, death, earth, electricity, evil, fear, fire, force, good, language-dependent, lawful, light, mind-affecting, sonic, and water.

Most of these descriptors have no game effect by themselves, but they govern how the spell interacts with other spells, with special abilities, with unusual creatures, with alignment, and so on.

A language-dependent spell uses intelligible language as a medium for communication. If the target cannot understand or cannot hear what the caster of a language-dependant spell says the spell fails.

A mind-affecting spell works only against creatures with an Intelligence score of 1 or higher."

This alignment shifting thing that some parts of the nwn2 community seem to believe likely spawned from this. However, if they did change alignment with every cast, that would be a "game effect" (which, the rules clearly state descriptors do not directly have). Spells interact with alignment, in certain ways. For example, clerics in the raw cannot cast spells of an alignment opposing their own (evil cannot cast [good] spells, lawful cannot cast [chaotic] spells, etc).

It could be interpreted this way, and I can understand why, but in my long time playing tabletop, no DM (and some of the DMs I've had have seemed to memorize every last bit of the ruleset) has ever shifted alignments due to a spell cast. Its a matter of minor debate on D&D fourms/discussion areas, rarely done (it seems) by tabletop DMs, and gospel in some sects of the nwn2 community. I know who I'm going to believe, and its not those parts of the nwn2 community.

[Mallore]

Chad.

I whole heartly believe the double shift is a crazy thing, I was merely debating the merits for evil spells moving people to evil. Chaos and Law is a whole other basket.

Though abyssal,. might be a good indication of chaos! =P


metaquad4 -

Book of Vile Darkness is a great read regarding magics corruption, I suggest the 2e edition for they got more indepth then the word limits on printing costs of the 3rd edition version.

Though the whole discriptior of the spell having the tag EVIL, is usually enough to tell for me. But I think this is a 20 page topic for another thread =).

[chad878262]

Question, in relation to Protection from Evil being a 'good' spell...

don't drow and other evil beings still have to cast this before they summon a demon/devil? This may be old school 2nd ed. coming out in me, but I am pretty sure that if you summoned those being without prot. from evil you were basically auto-toasted, right?

[metaquad4]

Alignment shifts didn't happen in D&D just from casting spells.

And yes, they could do that. We are playing in 3.5's ruleset, where clerics (not arcanists!) can't cast spells of an opposing alignment (in the raw). That might have not been the case in 2e. Plus, again. Arcanists could have done it safely, if it was the case in 2e. Plus, they could have warded their clergy.

[Mallore]

Question, in relation to Protection from Evil being a 'good' spell...

don't drow and other evil beings still have to cast this before they summon a demon/devil? This may be old school 2nd ed. coming out in me, but I am pretty sure that if you summoned those being without prot. from evil you were basically auto-toasted, right?

Yeah, and there was a bunch of other things you had to do to sometimes! 2e was way more detailed in stuff like this then the later 3rd, and 4th. But in 5th you can pull all that 2e awesomeness back in!

But yeah, casting protection good or evil isnt a spell that would change your alignment, whats involved isn't dreaded evil and your not hurting your world around you.. such as sucking the life force out of a person, or crushing a soul or making a dark pact.

[metaquad4]

Alignment shifts didn't happen in D&D just from casting spells.

Amendment:

Book of Vile Darkness does make note that some spells do lead to an evil alignment. It notes that evil spells can be cast by good characters, so long as they are for good intentions. It also notes that spells that create undead are always evil (creating undead is an evil action, as are a few other effects from spells such as harming souls).

It also makes notes of specific spells that are corrupting, but we don't have any of those spells here, so that is irrelevant.

Also, the Book of Exhaled Deeds makes note of a similar effect (spells that inspire hope, use the caster's energy for the betterment of another, etc). They even have their own version of corruption magic, called sanctified magic.

Not to mention each lists a lovely list of actions that can lead to good/evil. Perhaps, if we are going down this route, we can include them in our quests. Plenty of ideas! And plenty of them already exist in our quests.

But again. I don't think this is the best route. Leave the DM's job to the DMs.

[chad878262]

I would still say (just my opinion) that it should be left to DM's to award alignment points. I don't summon undead with non-evil characters, while if playing evil I make it a point to use abyssal might over options like Bulls STR/Cats Grace/Bears Endurance, not because it saves spell slots, but because it is evil. I generally like to trust other players that they will use spells in an RP manner and not only for mechanical reasons. Frankly, if some player is off grinding with a summoned undead on their LG Cleric of Lathander it only effects me if I run in to them and, if that happens it's pretty easy to take a screenshot and make an IC post that my character saw such-and-such good guy and to watch out for him because he is really super evil!!!

There can be RP consequences to players abusing 'evil' spells without DM involvement AND without a script granting chaotic evil points. I say trust the players to use spells in accordance with appropriate RP decisions for their characters and let them accept consequences if someone notices the spells they've cast, and their character understands the implications of those spells.

[NegInfinity]

Alignment shifts didn't happen in D&D just from casting spells.

And yes, they could do that. We are playing in 3.5's ruleset, where clerics (not arcanists!) can't cast spells of an opposing alignment (in the raw). That might have not been the case in 2e. Plus, again. Arcanists could have done it safely, if it was the case in 2e. Plus, they could have warded their clergy.

In addition to spells from books of evil, erm, Vile Darkness, there were optional corruption mechanics described in Fiendish Codex II (page 30). However, they did not shift alignments, instead they sent your character to baator once they died (and regardless of amount of good deeds character performed).

Adhering to a lawful alignment is no picnic. According to
the terms of the Pact Primeval, as negotiated between Asmo-
deus and the lawful deities, the good that mortals do in life
is outweighed by the taint of sin. For game purposes, each
act of evil that a PC commits adds to his corruption rating.
Any lawful character who dies with a corruption rating of
9 or higher goes to Baator, no matter how many orphans he
rescued or minions of evil he vanquished in life.
A devil assigned to harvest souls does so by inspiring
mortals to corrupt acts, whether through Faustian pacts, the
use of infernal items, or simple persuasion. The following
sinful acts, along with the corruption points they earn, focus
on activities in which adventurers are likely to engage.
Notable real-world acts of evil are intentionally omitted
from the above table. Mature groups who wish to admit life’s
grimmer side into their games can determine additional
corruption values using the above table as a baseline.

However, this does not apply to Faerun and BGTSCC, because they're not subject to Greyhawk death/incarnation rules and we have fugue/gods instead.

-------

Book of Vile Darkness is a great read regarding magics corruption, I suggest the 2e edition for they got more indepth then the word limits on printing costs of the 3rd edition version.

Alignment-shifting spells require [VILE] descriptor (which we do not have), and 2e rules do not apply to 3.5.

[Maecius]

I'll flag it up with the devs and DMs.

Only DMs should be able to change alignments, and only in reflection of RP over time.

No one should be able to mechanically change their alignment at will, because of the mechanical abuses and exploits open mechanical alignment shifts allow (as have already been noted).