Adding more than 1 alignment on a weapon

[Scion]

It just makes no sense for something to be Holy and Unholy at the same time, whatever the rules say.

That sounds like the same arguement people use to say that a weapon can not both have a fire enchantment and a cold enchantment on it.

I dont see a problem either way. Magic is odd. I have no problem with a nonintelligent object having each and every alignment out there. As far as I know only creatures have full alignments, objects can be 'aligned' in every which way though, it is just what they have on them.

 

[Abraxas]

An alignment of "Good" is Neutral-Good.

Is this actually stated in the books somewhere? If it is it would solve a number of problems.

AFAIK, there are no good aligned spells (or spell of any alignment)*, but if there were they would be LG, NG, or CG, because they are the only possible good alignments.

If there are no aligned spells what does this mean - PHB pg 33 - "Chaotic, Evil, Good, and Lawful Spells: A cleric can’t cast spells of an alignment opposed to his own or his deity’s (if he has one). For example, a good cleric (or a neutral cleric of a good deity) cannot cast evil spells. Spells associated with particular alignments are indicated by the chaos, evil, good, and law descriptors in their spell descriptions (see Chapter 11: Spells)"

It doesn't say they are Lawful Good, Neutral Good or Chaotic Good just Good (or any other combinations).

I agree with Scion - it sounds very similar to the no flaming/icy weapon arguement.

 

[Lamoni]

It doesn't say they are Lawful Good, Neutral Good or Chaotic Good just Good (or any other combinations).

I agree with Scion - it sounds very similar to the no flaming/icy weapon arguement.

Why would it try to confuse you by saying a spell was Lawful good, neutral good, or chaotic good? For example, a Paladin can use smite evil on any evil creature. He can use his detect evil ability to find an evil creature. I would hate it if the books tried to spell out all the possible types of evil. "You can smite lawful evil, neutral evil, or chaotic evil creatures" takes up a lot of space. I think we know if someone is evil by just looking at that part of their alignment.

However, does this lack of spelling it out make it possible for there to be a good evil creature? That would certainly confuse the spell or the smiting ability as it is written. Should they clarify it? No, because good evil is not an alignment in D&D. You'll never have a good evil creature, a good evil sword, etc. You can't have an alignment that doesn't exist.

Now, the only problem this poses to the weapon issue is that both Holy and Unholy add an alignment to the weapon. If a sword is Holy, you can't add unholy because it can't add the evil alignment to a good sword without removing the good alignment. If you remove the good alignment, you must also remove the Holy enhancement since Holy makes the weapon good.

If you houserule that Holy or Unholy only OPTIONALLY place an alignment on the weapon, then you could have a holy unholy sword and choose whether you wanted it to be good, neutral, or evil. That does require a house rule however.

 

[molonel]

Granted, you'd need a [Good] caster with access to Holy Smite to add the Holy quality and then an [Evil] caster with access to Unholy Blight to add the Unholy quality, but I don't see anything that says you can't do it.

Or an Ur Priest.

 

[Abraxas]

Why would it try to confuse you by saying a spell was Lawful good, neutral good, or chaotic good? For example, a Paladin can use smite evil on any evil creature. He can use his detect evil ability to find an evil creature. I would hate it if the books tried to spell out all the possible types of evil.

Not exactly the same thing because these abilities work on any type of evil and don't care about the law/chaos bit.

You'll never have a good evil creature, a good evil sword, etc.

A Lawful Good archlich would detect as both good and evil, a Chaotic Evil fallen archon would detect as both good and evil

Now, the only problem this poses to the weapon issue is that both Holy and Unholy add an alignment to the weapon. If a sword is Holy, you can't add unholy because it can't add the evil alignment to a good sword without removing the good alignment. If you remove the good alignment, you must also remove the Holy enhancement since Holy makes the weapon good.

If you houserule that Holy or Unholy only OPTIONALLY place an alignment on the weapon, then you could have a holy unholy sword and choose whether you wanted it to be good, neutral, or evil. That does require a house rule however.

No houserule is needed. There is no rule stating your position is correct, there is no rule stating my position is correct - both options require DM adjucation.

In addition, using your option that creating a Holy weapon makes it LG, NG or CG you have the potential to have the same problem when adding the anarchic or axiomatic special ability to said weapon. The Holy special ability doesn't specify a law/chaos component, so you would have a 2 in 3 chance of having a mismatched law/chaos component when trying to add the anarchic/axiomatic special ability. If the alignments are mismatched you would remove said alignment from the weapon and thus remove the Holy special ability also. Unless of course each component is a completely separate entity and has no bearing or connection to any other component of alignment

 

[Hypersmurf]

A Lawful Good archlich would detect as both good and evil, a Chaotic Evil fallen archon would detect as both good and evil

A Lawful Good archlich is good but not evil; he registers on both a detect good and detect evil spell.

A Chaotic Evil fallen archon is evil but not good; he registers on both a detect good and detect evil spell.

Detect Evil detects more things than just evil creatures; just because someone registers on a Detect Evil spell is not an assurance that they have an evil alignment.

The Holy special ability doesn't specify a law/chaos component, so you would have a 2 in 3 chance of having a mismatched law/chaos component when trying to add the anarchic/axiomatic special ability.

A Holy Axiomatic weapon is good aligned (because it's Holy) and lawfully-aligned (because it's axiomatic). Its alignment is Lawful Good.

As long as its alignment is not non-good, it's still satisfying the text of the Holy ability. Changing alignment from Chaotic Good to Lawful Good has no effect on the legality of the Holy ability.

-Hyp.

 

[Abraxas]

Detect Evil detects more things than just evil creatures; just because someone registers on a Detect Evil spell is not an assurance that they have an evil alignment.

Oh I know - I was just noting good & evil can be found on the same creature in an off hand manner thus the

As long as its alignment is not non-good, it's still satisfying the text of the Holy ability. Changing alignment from Chaotic Good to Lawful Good has no effect on the legality of the Holy ability.

So you are saying that you can separate the law/chaos portion of the alignment from the good/evil. Then why can't the Holy weapon special ability or Align Weapon spell just apply one component (good/evil or law/chaos) of alignment without the other component? And in your own game do you always supply the missing component for weapons that are Holy/Unholy/Anarchic/Axiomatic? Do you let Characters know they are using a lawful evil axiomatic battleaxe?

 

[Li Shenron]

That sounds like the same arguement people use to say that a weapon can not both have a fire enchantment and a cold enchantment on it.

Not at all, as I have no problems with a Flaming Frost weapon (mmm... have you ever eaten an ice cream flambeaux? ). In that case I could say "it's just magic", but when it comes to alignment, I cannot just slap a "Holy" property on a weapon like it's any other bonuses.

 

[ARandomGod]

I actually really like the idea of an anarchic, axiomatic, holy, unholy weapon for true neutral characters to wield.

In one of my favorite book/series (The Renshai Chronicles), a main character gets a sword called "Balance", which I would translate into being a Lawful/axiomatic weapon (Good and evil were lesser alignments in the stories world-view).

I can also easily see a weapon designed to balance good and evil.

I can see other reasons to allow it (or not allow it) than simply that the rules don't say it's allowed/not allowed. And those other reasons are all Flavor. And it's a good flavor. Go ahead, try some.


Edit: Now, take that "anarchic, axiomatic, holy, unholy weapon", add magebane (for fun), and of course it's got to be +1, and put that in the first adventure of a new group. There's nothing like giving a level one character a +10 weapon for some real action. It's best if the weapon is found in someplace long-forgotten, of course. Preferably someplace that's so obscure even most bards don't know about the weapon anymore.

PS, don't let them get it ID's at the local mage, because you KNOW that guy would steal it. Even if he is LG. There are lawful ways to steal an item.

 

[Vraille Darkfang]

Actually,

I have a handful of Lawful/Chaotic Good/Evil Combo Weapons in my campaign.

Most are Artifacts (thus the wierdness).

Those that are not were created (somehow)* by a Sect of Druids so that only they could Wield Lawful/Holy/Chaotic/Unholy Weapons (or other True N beings).

And one party member does have an Intelligent Holy, Unholy Outsider (evil), Outsider (good)Bane Weapon.

The weapon does has some serious mental issues (and an ungodly Ego score) to say the least. (Say Two-Face from Batman, only more schizophrenic).

More of a Cursed Item, Really.

But, I have no problem with multpile Alignments Abilities in Weapons. They are just very rare, wierd items that have a really interesting Back-Story. And a PC trying to create one would have all sorts of hurdles to jump over.

*Sacrificed/Trapped Outsiders/People of those alignments in order to fuel the Item Creation Process (Later Items dropped the Holy Aspect as the Druid Sect drifted more and more to NE).