D&D General A paladin just joined the group. I'm a necromancer.

[Chaosmancer]

A whole gray campaign is welcome once in a while. In my book this is considered a one shot that lasted 2 years. I did play Vampire, Werewolf and Cthuluh and there is enough gray in there to entertain those who like gray. As a player I love gray. Especially in Vampire the Masquerade. But as a DM, I prefer a Heroic style where good and evil are clear and easy to identify. Once in while there might be a villain that tries to pass as a good person but I often leave a few hints that it ain't so.

I think this misses something though.

You can still have good and evil be easily identifiable, without having races be default good or evil.

The guy summoning demons to destroy the city, he's evil. But just because you run into an orc tribe doesn't mean they are about to get to some hard core raiding and pillaging.

Individuals can be evil. Groups, harder to tell.

 

[Maxperson]

No, you proved that RAW is conflicting. Not the same thing

No. I showed that FLUFF was conflicting, and it doesn't actually conflict since nothing in the orc entry says that they always act in those manners. Not the same thing as RAW in most circumstances, including this one.

So, by RAW, the spell could create non-evil zombies.

If the DM changes it, sure. Not by default, though. Default is by the alignment section the stat block.

You are the one arguing they aren't evil. You are the one with the burden of proof here.

I never made that argument.

"these orcs are evil, the default says they are evil" you are the one who jumped up and said that was wrong.

Bzzzt! wrong. I said that evil doesn't mean that they attack everything on sight. Nothing you quoted from the Orc fluff says "always" in response to their desire for mayhem etc., so they don't always attack unless the DM opts to play them that way.

Self Defense.

So you're argument is that simply being evil is a lethal attack on the PCs? That's bupkis. Orcs by default fluff do not always attack, therefore unless they are attacking there is no self-defense argument. If you walk in and hack down non-attack orcs, you are evil.

You seem to keep forgetting that I am a DM. When I was arguing for a RAW way to make undead non-evil. I was a DM, here, talking about the RAW lore and rules for orcs? I am a DM.

RAW allows you to homebrew, therefore homebrewing them to be non-evil is a RAW way to make them non-evil. Simple and done.

 

[FrogReaver]

You aren't bound by the RAW of the Spell, so you can use the other rules in the MM for placement of encounters. If you use the spell, the spell RAW dictating the use of the statblock comes into play as well.

Now we are getting somewhere!

Curious. What makes the spell bound to the alignment part of the statblock when RAW explicitly calls out that alignment in a stat blocks can be changed?

 

[Helldritch]

Now we are getting somewhere!

Curious. What makes the spell bound to the alignment part of the statblock when RAW explicitly calls out that alignment in a stat blocks can be changed?

There is always the possibility of a flux in a given population. X race is always Evil and Chaotic but for some reason, this member of X race is Good and Lawful. The RAW just means that. All specters are evil, but in one of my adventure a Paladin became a specter and kept his alignment. He wanted to end is curse and was seeking a way to end his misery but his undead part was forcing self preservation upon him. Does that make it that all specters can be Lawful Good? No. He was the exception that was confirming the rule. So is the Lawfull Good orc. He is the exception that is confirming the rule. If you modify a stat block, especially alignment, it must be for a story/adventure purpose.

A spell that summons evil things, will always summon evil things. It will not take the exception. Why? Just because is quite enough for me.

 

[FrogReaver]

There is always the possibility of a flux in a given population. X race is always Evil and Chaotic but for some reason, this member of X race is Good and Lawful. The RAW just means that. All specters are evil, but in one of my adventure a Paladin became a specter and kept his alignment. He wanted to end is curse and was seeking a way to end his misery but his undead part was forcing self preservation upon him. Does that make it that all specters can be Lawful Good? No. He was the exception that was confirming the rule. So is the Lawfull Good orc. He is the exception that is confirming the rule. If you modify a stat block, especially alignment, it must be for a story/adventure purpose.

A spell that summons evil things, will always summon evil things. It will not take the exception. Why? Just because is quite enough for me.

Doesn't that mean the player summoning non-evil skeletons and non-evil zombies would be the exception confirming the rule?

 

[Maxperson]

Now we are getting somewhere!

Curious. What makes the spell bound to the alignment part of the statblock when RAW explicitly calls out that alignment in a stat blocks can be changed?

So first, it's not bound. Nothing is bound since the DM is free to homebrew whatever he likes by RAW. Second, the stat block is the default. Changing default requires homebrew or house rule.

 

[FrogReaver]

So first, it's not bound. Nothing is bound since the DM is free to homebrew whatever he likes by RAW.

So argue with yourself on that. You are the one that used bound to contrast changing the alignment for non-summoned creatures and not changing it for summoned ones. I was just using your terminology

Second, the stat block is the default. Changing default requires homebrew or house rule.

So it's homebrew or house rule for an Orc to not be evil? Just making sure I understand.

 

[FrogReaver]

@Chaosmancer - I just realized the perfect argument that would have made sense to them. That "those who frequently animate the dead are evil" isn't a rule - it's just flavor text.

 

[Helldritch]

Doesn't that mean the player summoning non-evil skeletons and non-evil zombies would be the exception confirming the rule?

Well, if you see it that way...
The solution would be to create a new spell that create non evil undead. Otherwise, the spell would always create evil undead. Then, you have to find a deity that would not be offended by such a blatant attack on the cosmology. Not counting Orcus, lord of the undead that would be quite p***d off by such an attack on his lordship. Not counting the different life deities that would be offended by such an act coming from a non evil person.

On a more serious note. No it would not work this way. An exception to the rule is not something you can reproduce at will. If you can reproduce it at will, it is no longer an exception but a pattern. A pattern is not an exception and thus become a rule on its own.

Edit: Damn the auto corrector...

 

[Eltab]

Is it a Good act to remove evil from the world?

If the answer is yes, here is a list of all the Sentient races that it would be a good act to Genocide

Spoiler: The List

Aboleths
Beholders
Bugbears
Bullywugs
Chuuls
Cloakers
Any Demon or Devil
Any Chromatic Dragon
Duergar
Drow
Ettins
Fomorians
Dao Genies
Efreeti Genies
Fire Giants
Frost Giants
Hill Giants
Githyanki
Gnolls
Goblins
Grell
Grimlocks
Any Hag
Harpies
Hobgoblins
Jackalweres
Kobolds
Krakens
Kuo-Toa
Lamias
Wereboars
Wererats
Werewolves
Manticores
Medusa
Merrows
Mindflayers
Minotaurs
Spirit Nagas
Ogres
Oni
Orcs
Peryton
Rakshasa
Sahuagin
Salamanders
Troglodytes
Trolls
Umber Hulks
Yetis
Yuan-ti
Any Yugoloth
Barghest
Chitines
Cranium Rats
Firenewts
Grung
Leucrotta
Meenlocks
Morkoths
Neogi
Quicklings
Redcaps
Tlincalli
Vargouille
Xvarts
Yeth Hounds
Balhannoths
Berbalangs
Chokers
Derro
Howlers
Ooblex
Any Sorrowsworn
Any Star Spawn

That is 75 examples.

Defiling is Evil because I slay every living thing around me and leave behind ash / dust unable to support any future living thing. But my Good Cause will balance it all out in the end. (Yeah, that's the ticket!)
All abo-o-ard! Next stop, Athas!