Atoning a Vampire?

[Hypersmurf]

That's a misreading of "Detect Evil."

I disagree.

On the chart it shows "Undead," not "Evil Undead," that's true, but Undead do not, in general, have "Evil Auras," only Evil Undead do.

The only place in the books that tells us what has an "Evil Aura" is the text of Detect Evil.

... which tells us that Undead do, in fact, have Evil Auras. That's how you can detect them.

I'd agree with you only if the spell made it very clear you detected undead in general, but it does not - you detect "Evil Auras."

Yup. Which are possessed by evil creatures, evil outsiders, clerics of evil deities, evil items, evil spells, and undead.

The spell does make it very clear.

Noe. No evil aura. Not in general, anyway.

It's not found in the Type description. You won't find "Evil Aura" in any Type description. You find it under Detect Magic.

Notice that the Type description doesn't mention that Cure spells damage undead. You find those rules under the spell descriptions.

-Hyp.

 

[Artoomis]

Hypersmurf, you are just plain wrong on this one.

I see no real justification for assuming all undead have evil auras - that's a stretch. That should mean that a Paladin could smite ALL undead, not just evil undead, and that's just plain wrong.

I don't expect to convince you, though.

 

[Hypersmurf]

That should mean that a Paladin could smite ALL undead, not just evil undead.

Not at all.

A Lawful Neutral Cleric of a Lawful Evil deity is "a creature that is not evil", and is unaffected by a Smite.

Nevertheless, he displays an evil aura to a Detect Evil.

Detect Evil detects several things, including evil creatures.

Smite Evil affects only evil creatures and creatures with the [Evil] subtype.

Detect Evil detects undead, per the spell description. If that undead happens to be an evil creature, it will be affected by a Smite. If it isn't, it won't be.

I see no real justification for assuming all undead have evil auras...

How about the fact that undead are animated by negative energy, and channelling negative energy is an evil act?

How about the fact that Animate Dead, Create Undead, and Create Greater Undead are all spells with the [Evil] descriptor?

-Hyp.

 

[Lord Pendragon]

Regarding the sub-thread that's erupted about Detect Evil, I'm with Hyp. There is a clear trend in the core rules for undead to be treated as evil, even though other products, such as FR, specifically allow for good undead as well.

Regarding the original poster's query, it depends entirely on what constitutes a vampire in your game world. If you are using the MM vampire, then I would say no, vampires cannot atone period. They are always evil, they automatically change to evil when created. This says to me that something about the vampire state makes them evil. You can rationalize this however you like--no soul, demonic possession, corruption, whatever--but the end result is the same: once you become a vampire, you become evil, and stay evil. Being a vampire means being evil. As such, they cannot atone for anything, because they'll never want to.

Now, still using the MM vampire, I might as a DM allow for a vampire to be converted against it's will, if there were some reason I wanted or needed an Angel-type vampire around. However this would not be possible through standard magic. It would involve a quest, with a researched spell specific to the vampire in question, and a possibly very difficult to obtain material component.

 

[BSF]

I agree with Hypersmurf here. Cleric's of Evil dieties show up on a Detect Evil, even if they are 1 step away in alignment. Undead show up on a Detect Evil.

In 3.0, skeletons and zombies were neutral. But, creating undead is an evil act. In 3.5, skeletons and zombies are neutral evil, even though they are, essentially, mindless. I suspect that with 3.5, they changed the alignments to clarify that all undead show up as Evil, since in the core rules, all undead are evil. Good undead are a non-core concept.

Back on subject, by the rules, the kill vampire, True Rez former vampire, atone former vampire seems like the surest option.

It sounds like a cool storyarc though. I wouldn't be adverse to finding a way to help an existing undead atone in my game, for a good story.

 

[Jeff Wilder]

Hypersmurf is correct in his interpretation. Believe me; I lost a $500 bet arguing the other way. In fact, the change of mindless undead from Neutral to Neutral Evil is, in part, because of the stink I raised about this.

IMO, mindless undead in D&D were, traditionally, not intended to be evil. 3.0 changed that, albeit very, very clumsily. The only place the "change" was written was in the detect evil spell, and even there it was open to exactly the arguments being made here now. Even worse, in 3.0 a zombie pinged under detect evil, but had absolutely no problems while within a protection from evil. Sheesh.

But Skip ruled that undead automatically radiate evil, and at some point Monte seemed to confirm that was intended, so I shrugged.

Then 3.5 made yet another clumsy change, by giving mindless undead an alignment of Neutral Evil rather than simply the [Evil] descriptor. (The idea of a mindless creature being of evil alignment is against the way alignment has always worked.) Very, very stupid.

 

[Wippit Guud]

Oh I just discovered something messy....

Shadowdancer PrC:
Summon Shadow (Su): At 3rd level, a shadowdancer can summon a shadow, an undead shade. Unlike a normal shadow, this shadow’s alignment matches that of the shadowdancer...

Lawful Good Shadowdancer... Lawful Good shadow. Shows up on detect evil.

 

[Bauglir]

Then 3.5 made yet another clumsy change, by giving mindless undead an alignment of Neutral Evil rather than simply the [Evil] descriptor. (The idea of a mindless creature being of evil alignment is against the way alignment has always worked.) Very, very stupid.

For some reason, I was under the impression that mindless undead, when left without orders would default to attacking any living creature they encountered. I can't see a reference in the SRD to support this; perhaps it's in the full MM description (or perhaps it just came from my fevered imagination )

If this was the case it may go a way to explaining an evil alignment?

 

[Jeff Wilder]

If this was the case it may go a way to explaining an evil alignment?

Nah. (Well, not for me, anyway.) No more than a berzerk flesh golem is evil. (I don't think I've ever read that "default attacking" thing, BTW.)

 

[Artoomis]

...Detect Evil detects undead, per the spell description. If that undead happens to be an evil creature, it will be affected by a Smite. If it isn't, it won't be...-Hyp.

Okay, let's say I agree with you, for argument's sake.

That means that a paladin's Detect Evil and Smite Evil are not complementary abilities - that is, just because you can detect it as evil does not mean you can smite it as evil.

Wow - surely that's not what the designers had in mind.

Okay, then, what is your suggestion for fixing it so that the abilities would be complementary. Narrow the scope of Detect Evil or broaden the scope of Smite Evil?