Advantages of good?

[Dross]

Protection from Balance. Introduce it. Voila, levelled playing field.

But i'd qustion the usefulness of a spell unless you knew that you would be up against a neutral. Generally the bad guy's use of any anti-good spell mentioned above is worthwhile, as is any anti-evil spell used by the PC's.

Most advantages seem to be RP in nature (people will TRUST you).

I's say that if the DM uses the fact that you are Good against you (or enforces some alignment guided decisions etc), then the DM needs to reward you in some way. Even if only that the best seat in the tavern is always available to you and you don't get the watered wine.

 

[Seeten]

Many summons, including Druidic summons, are neutral animals. Many Gods are Gods of Law, or Fate, and are neutral. I am shocked there isnt a Protection from Balance, or Protection against Neutrality spell already.

It'd help against Animals, the majority of the core races, and many monsters, Modrons, and Slaad.

I don't know why anyone would be against a spell so obvious. If I were a Wizard in real D&D, it'd be one of my first inventions.

 

[amethal]

It is minor.

Holy word, holy smite, do not harm you, so a benefit.

Thanks for the responses.

So, any players out there ever had the BBEG cast holy word on the party ..... ?

 

[Thanee]

Not the BBEG...

One benefit is also, that Detect Good works on you. Helps with the Diplomacy in church matters.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Brother MacLaren]

Many summons, including Druidic summons, are neutral animals. Many Gods are Gods of Law, or Fate, and are neutral. I am shocked there isnt a Protection from Balance, or Protection against Neutrality spell already.

Prot. Evil blocks physical contact from both evil and neutral summoned creatures (good creatures are exempt).
It seems likely that the other spells are meant to be mirror images of this spell, but as it's written, they aren't.

 

[Tiberius]

GATE.

Good guy: DM usually has no good reason not to send the solar you requested to bust the BBEG.

Neutral guy: DM: "sorry, the solars are lazy these days - try a marut". Player: $%//(%$!!

Ah, I believe you meant to say for both of these "DM has no choice but to send you the solar you requested to bust the BBEG." Gate doesn't rely on the consent of the summoned unless it's a unique creature (however poorly-defined that may be).

 

[Particle_Man]

If you have Elements of Magic mages, they can focus their spells to be sorta-selective on the cheap by doing "Heal Good" (which can include "mass" versions of the spell). There is not "Heal Neutral" equivalent, though there is Heal Life, and anyhow, you might be fighting againsts Neutrals.

 

[Elder-Basilisk]

Well, some would argue that being good is an advantage itself. (Socrates, for instance, maintained that a virtuous man is, by definition, happy, regardless of his present circumstances).

On a less philosophical slant...
-you can use spells like holy word and holy smite without being a part of the collateral damage. Of course, this works best if the whole party is good, but even if there is just a good cleric and you, it can work to your advantage.

-in some settings, you are less vulnerable to certain spells--in Arcanis, for instance, glimpse of the cauldron is less effective against good characters than against evil ones.

-Expanded class options. You can be a sacred exorcist (one of the better cleric prestige classes). You can multiclass with paladin (pretty nice if you're a melee sorcerer--IMO, Paladin 2/Sorcerer/Spellsword/Eldritch Knight/Abjurant Champion is a lot better than Fighter/sorcerer/the rest). You can be a Radiant Servant of Pelor. IIRC, Combat Medic also requires good alignment. Maybe not at the same time, but you also have to be good to be a holy liberator.

-(If a cleric) you can craft a holy weapon without jumping through non-core hoops to get the glory domain.


Also, note that the disadvantages of being good mostly show up at the low-mid levels. At higher levels, shield of faith is better than protection from good anyway, blasphemy works just as well against neutrals as against good characters, and unholy aura is nearly as effective against neutral characters as it is against good characters.

 

[billd91]

Maybe it's just me, but I think neutral clerics should strive to create a balance in their summoning. So for every fiendish dire ape you summon, you should summon a celestial griffon, for example.


(edited spelling)

That depends on why they're neutral. Are they neutral because they believe in balance or because they don't care enough to be on one side or the other? If the latter, then they wouldn't care about balance either. They'd just summon the best creature for the current job and not sweat the philosophical ramifications of what they summoned.

 

[airwalkrr]

There are a few mechanical benefits to being good. Namely that you are immune to effects that target evil or neutral creatures. For example, you are immune to holy smite, holy word, and similar effects. Additionally, you radiate a good aura, which is detectable by many creatures (most notably those from the outer planes). Such creatures are far more likely to trust you and empathize with you.

Unfortunately, the greatest reward for virtue is virtue. Neutral is mechanically the most advantageous alignment as long as you DM doesn't throw holy word, word of chaos, etc. at you all the time. I usually play good characters however, because I find that having a good alignment and acting good is the best way to get on good terms with NPCs. NPCs (even evil ones) prefer working with good characters because they believe them to be trustworthy. In horror campaigns, playing a good alignment is often as difficult as playing an evil alignment in a typical campaign, but it is by no means a necessarily bad thing, simply a challenge.