Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Lonely Tylenol" data-source="post: 3191704" data-attributes="member: 18549">By definition, casting an evil spell is an evil act.&nbsp; However, since evil is a normal english word and [Evil] is a game-mechanics term, casting an [Evil] spell is an evil act if one of the following conditions is true:1. The purpose of casting the spell is to commit evil2. There is a rule that states that [Evil] is evilThere's no need to define evil acts, because they're already defined, based on the definition of the word evil.&nbsp; However, since [Evil] is a term made up specifically for D&amp;D, there is a need to define it.&nbsp; And the definition provided does not imply that [Evil] is always evil, just that it is usually so.So the paladin burning down the orphanage is committing an evil act by virtue of the act being evil.&nbsp; But the paladin/sorcerer who casts Eyebite is not necessarily committing an evil act, so long as he does not satisfy conditions 1 or 2.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Lonely Tylenol, post: 3191704, member: 18549"] By definition, casting an evil spell is an evil act. However, since evil is a normal english word and [Evil] is a game-mechanics term, casting an [Evil] spell is an evil act if one of the following conditions is true: 1. The purpose of casting the spell is to commit evil 2. There is a rule that states that [Evil] is evil There's no need to define evil acts, because they're already defined, based on the definition of the word evil. However, since [Evil] is a term made up specifically for D&D, there is a need to define it. And the definition provided does not imply that [Evil] is always evil, just that it is usually so. So the paladin burning down the orphanage is committing an evil act by virtue of the act being evil. But the paladin/sorcerer who casts Eyebite is not necessarily committing an evil act, so long as he does not satisfy conditions 1 or 2. [/QUOTE]

Verification