Search results

Is it? Zeus killed Aesclepius because he was brining people back from the dead, and thus threatening the natural order. That story was written by the Greeks more than 2 millennia ago. Why is magic that causes death or deals with death evil, but using a sword to cause death not evil? People...

Death itself isn't evil. Even good people have to admit that death is a necessary part of nature and the cycle of life. The sun may rise, but it also must set. I like the name "necromancy." Necromancers are a popular enough archetype to be their own class in many games. At the very least...

Legally speaking, perhaps. That's why I think if there is any alignment component to animating the dead at all, it's a law vs. chaos issue, not a good vs. evil one.

Yes, it absolutely is. There are human beings. There are familiar plants and animals, cycles and seasons, and countless other fundamental Earth-like elements. They just add to it and change some things. Add dragons. Add magic. Add beholders. But there is still grass, there are trees, there are...

Our world is the foundation upon which the fantasy worlds of DnD are based. You're also missing my point. I'm simply pointing out that different cultures have different views of right and wrong, proper and improper, sacred and repulsive, etc. That's no less true in DnD than it is here on Earth...

The problem with your argument is that you're assuming animate dead is something so cheap and easy to do that it can be effectively mass produced. How many spellcasters can a kingdom be expected to have that are both high enough level to cast that spell and also know animate dead? And what about...

Sure, if you don't mind. I don't have a Twitter account myself.

Every culture has practices that other people find to be disgusting or repulsive. That doesn't make them evil. Burial practices in particular vary widely from one culture to another. Some cultures bury their dead, some burn them, some leave them out for scavengers to eat, some even practice...

I had posted this on the WotC forums and just copy/pasted it here, as I thought it could be a good discussion. That, and you never know, maybe the good folks at WotC visit these boards too.

There are many things that are taboo to certain cultures that aren't evil. Many people consider corpses to be dirty, creepy, disgusting, etc. I don't see entire worlds suddenly implementing mass undead labor just because the spell animate dead lost the [evil] tag.

But that's exactly what an RPG is, do what you want. That doesn't mean there aren't repercussions, obviously. But the game doesn't really need to go out of its way to declare that fireballing innocent peasants is evil. Oh? I had heard that the private playtest was still ongoing and people were...

OMG. Who is breeding chocobos with rabbits? :lol:

Right, I'm just talking about the way they portray warlocks in general. They could make them seem awesome, or they could make them seem like pitiful fools. What any individual happens to think about them is, of course, entirely up to them. Yeah, probably not the best example.

Sure, wizards might look down on warlocks or view them with suspicion or distaste. But it should be kind of like the way a jedi sees the sith. They may totally disagree with their methods, but they still acknowledge that their power is very real. Not, "haha what a chump."

They've done a good thing by answering the will of the vast majority of players and getting rid of alignment restrictions in classes. They've also done a good thing by changing things such as detect evil and smite. Only only last vestige of alignment restriction nonsense remains, and that's the...

While I have no problem with warlocks being based on pacts, I would like to have the option to play a warlock whose ancestor made the pact, or who was marked by some supernatural force without his consent, cursed by a fey while in the crib, etc. I also think it's very important that warlocks, no...

I think what he means by "higher potency" is that the spell slots migrate to higher levels, so the spells that have greater effect when cast in higher level slots (like fireball), improve because the warlock replaces lower level slots with higher level ones.

It sounds pretty cool. It sounds kind of like a mix between the 3.5/4e warlock, with a bit of binder and hexblade mixed in. I love the sound of the at-will invocations, though I'd like to see some examples. I hope they get quite a few invocations, because with only 2-4 spell slots, their spells...

I like those ideas. I was just speaking in general terms, not responding to your ideas in particular.

I prefer the idea of AC scaling with level, in principle. After all, it makes sense to me that characters get better at defending themselves, not just attacking. The problem is, characters in 5e can already get ridiculously high AC scores, well into the mid-high 20s, making them pretty much...