Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="AtomicPope" data-source="post: 8471899" data-attributes="member: 64790">A big change in D&amp;D was removing the &quot;evil&quot; descriptor from spells.&nbsp; In 1e the use of poison was deemed &quot;evil&quot; and no person regularly using poison could have a good alignment.&nbsp; Necromancy had a stigma.&nbsp; AD&amp;D had always stigmatized Necromancy as &quot;evil&quot; but it wasn't strictly limited to evil alignments like poison use.&nbsp; Second Edition expanded into kit classes that had sinister qualities, but I don't remember them being limited to evil alignments only.&nbsp; It wasn't until 3e where we had good and evil spell descriptors baked into the system.&nbsp; Book of Vile Darkness expanded on that.&nbsp; In 3e the intention of the spell didn't matter, it was the origin of the spell that determined whether or not the spell was evil.&nbsp; That's in-line with the original concept of the Great Wheel Cosmology™, exploring and expanding it.In some ways I wish we'd get back to those fantasy elements of good and evil being living forces like in Time Bandits.&nbsp; On the other hand, it would limit the way many people want to play D&amp;D so it's probably not the best way to go about doing it.&nbsp; Like with poison use, that in-and-of-itself shouldn't be relegated to evil for all campaigns.&nbsp; Allowing for flexibility is good for the game as a whole.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="AtomicPope, post: 8471899, member: 64790"] A big change in D&D was removing the "evil" descriptor from spells. In 1e the use of poison was deemed "evil" and no person regularly using poison could have a good alignment. Necromancy had a stigma. AD&D had always stigmatized Necromancy as "evil" but it wasn't strictly limited to evil alignments like poison use. Second Edition expanded into kit classes that had sinister qualities, but I don't remember them being limited to evil alignments only. It wasn't until 3e where we had good and evil spell descriptors baked into the system. Book of Vile Darkness expanded on that. In 3e the intention of the spell didn't matter, it was the origin of the spell that determined whether or not the spell was evil. That's in-line with the original concept of the Great Wheel Cosmology™, exploring and expanding it. In some ways I wish we'd get back to those fantasy elements of good and evil being living forces like in Time Bandits. On the other hand, it would limit the way many people want to play D&D so it's probably not the best way to go about doing it. Like with poison use, that in-and-of-itself shouldn't be relegated to evil for all campaigns. Allowing for flexibility is good for the game as a whole. [/QUOTE]

Verification