Can a good creature be fiendish and can an evil creature be celestial?

[gooeylouie]

In the 3.5 monster manual, it says evil and neutral monsters can be fiendish. Does that mean no fiendish unicorns, gold dragons and the like? What about monsters that are only "Usually" or "Often" good? Can they be fiendish since there are non-good examples of them (like if an elf which is "usually chaotic good" were fiendish. Can it happen?)

 

[delericho]

For 'Usually' creatures I would generally say "no", because it's an inherited template and such creatures are by nature pre-disposed towards Good. For 'Often' creatures, that being a lesser descriptor, I would say "yes".

Having said that, there are a small number of ways to get the Fiendish template without it being inherited. For those exceptional cases, I would allow it - for 'Often Good' creatures, for 'Usually Good' creatures, and even for 'Always Good' creatures (since, in 3.5e, 'Always Good' doesn't actually mean always Good).

That said, if you're the DM then you should do what seems best for your game.

 

[Jackinthegreen]

Keep in mind that even an entry of "always" in the creature's alignment line doesn't mean there aren't rare cases when one changes. For example, the succubus paladin.

I know of at least one way to make a fiendish creature Good-aligned: The Sanctified Creature template from Book of Exalted Deeds. Since fiendish doesn't grant the creature the Evil subtype, it works.

 

[I'm A Banana]

Does that mean no fiendish unicorns, gold dragons and the like? What about monsters that are only "Usually" or "Often" good?

You can do it. Even by RAW, a creature that is "always" good in the statblock can still be evil or neutral in the individual case, so you can just have it be a rare individual evil fiendish solar (or whatever).

 

[delericho]

Keep in mind that even an entry of "always" in the creature's alignment line doesn't mean there aren't rare cases when one changes.

In general, this is true. But the specific templates under discussion are inherited rather than acquired. As such, one doesn't become a fiendish elf; one has to be born a fiendish elf. This may* change matters.

I know of at least one way to make a fiendish creature Good-aligned...

Indeed. But this is the opposite case - a fiendish creature that becomes Good, rather than a creature that should be Good that is instead born* fiendish.

* Of course, since templates are usually for DM use, and the DM can (and should) generally change what he wants, it's a bit of a non-issue. And if this discussion is actually motivated by a desire to use it for a PC, then the player should be talking to his DM, and not us, anyway.

 

[Ulrick]

It all depends on how the DM wants to run his game, and if the players except his decision.

 

[Celebrim]

You're the DM. You certainly can have a fiendish creature be good or a celestial creature be evil. You're the DM. You can do anything you want.

However, speaking as a DM, I think it would be a bad idea.

As I see it, you have things like humans that express the concept of free will. They aren't innately good or evil, but can be monsterous or righteous depending on their choices.

If fiendish and celestial creatures can be monsterous or righteous depending on their choices, then they don't add ANYTHING to your game. You've already got humans, and everything else that is like them - orcs, goblins, elves, whatever - in that conceptual role. All you've done is add another class of humans with bumps on their forehead or wings or whatever.

The natural thinig to assume is that fiendish and celestial beings don't express the concept of free will. They are innately good or evil, and express those concepts by being a literal embodiment of those ideas. In other words, they aren't good because they are celetial, they are celestial because they are good. They are made of good, and not made of some admixture that allows them to choose. Their fundamental nature is good. If for some reason they ceased to be good - a process that is difficult to imagine because it involves replacing their whole body and being - they cease to be celestial and in fact cease to be themselves. In other words, if a celestial being were to become evil, it would also become fiendish and cease to be celestial. Vica versa, a fiendish being that was good, would probably cease to express fiendishness in form as well as nature because FORM IS NATURE in this case. If you want cases were form isn't nature, back up and do humans or something like them (good natured orcs, if you want to play against physical sterotype).

I also generally avoid the concept of 'risen fiend' or 'fallen celestial'. In most peoples common sense understanding of what 'fallen angel' means, it renders the celestial again - little more than a human with wings. That is fundamentally uninteresting and adds nothing to the game not already inherent in 'human'. If you really were interested in the sociology of a society that would develop if humans could fly, have flying humans and explore that. If you are actually interested in good and evil, then don't replace your archetypes for those things with something merely human because it obscures all understanding of the thing studied.

 

[nijineko]

if one is playing d&d, the fallen celestial is a core concept. seems they skipped out on the redeemed fiend, however.

 

[radja]

if all else fails, there's still the classic helm of opposite alignment...

 

[Empirate]

I seem to remember hearing a story somewhere about a powerful angel who turned to darkness and fell into evil. I believe his name means "Lightbearer" in some ancient tongue. I could be mistaken, though...



Seriously: if you have to ask, you don't understand what the rules of the game are for. They're there as a structural concept that is meant to help you tell a good and interesting story. Rules are supposed to be facilitators of good stories, not to cramp your style. So you have a good story about a redeemed Succubus to tell, or about a fallen angel, or even about a being of pure law fallen into chaos: go ahead.



[Ah... that was such an awesome game...]