Is it inherently evil to summon up a demon?

[kenjib]

Perhaps I am failing to recall correctly, but I do not believe that this is ever stated anywhere. Could you point me to where it says the evil descriptor does any more than limit clerics in what spells they cast or explain how such spells hold up under divination magics? By your logic summoning a celestial away from whatever important duties they happen to be performing you are doing a good act. If some evil necromancer summons enough celestial hawks does this suddenly mean they are on the path to redemption?

It doesn't say it explicitly, but let's look at the various parts of the SRD related to this:

"Summon Monster I
Conjuration (Summoning) [see text]
...
When the character uses a summoning spell to summon an air, chaotic, earth, evil, fire, good, lawful, or water creature, it is a spell of that type."

"Planar Binding
Conjuration (Calling) [see text]
...
When the character uses a calling spell to call an air, chaotic, earth, evil, fire, good, lawful, or water creature, it is a spell of that type."

"Detect Evil
...
Evil creature HD / 5
...
Evil magic item
or spell Caster level / 2"


Summoning spells are evil when cast to summon a demon. They have the evil descriptor, which is to say that the spells are described in the rules as being evil. Both the spell and the creature brought into the world also detect as evil.


"Chaotic, Evil, Good, and Lawful Spells: A cleric can't cast spells of an alignment opposed to his own or to his deity's. "


According to the SRD, every single good deity in existance forbids his servants from casting evil spells.

Okay, the spell is described as evil and detects as evil and is banned from use by all devotees of all good gods everywhere. It is explicitly a taboo -- creating something evil, which you are not allowed to do. For me the implication is crystal clear. Morality is a fundamental and immaleable constant in D&D and all deities (being the supreme authorities on morality) universally declare that this is an evil act. Casting good spells is likewise a good act forbidden by evil gods.

From my standpoint, how evil the act is, is what remains an open point of discussion. It may indeed be the lesser of two evils, and thus the best possible choice for someone presented with a moral dilemma and as such will not incur any noticeable alignment shift. That still does not make it somehow no longer an evil act though.

As regards "summoning a celestial away from whatever important duties they happen to be performing," this is not an issue to me. The celestials want to be summoned. Being summoned and performing acts of good is one of the duties that they perform. It is not an interruption.

 

[AuraSeer]

I think the question needs to be restated. By asking, "Is this act evil?" what we really want to know in game terms is, "Will this act eventually change my aligment to evil?"

The answer depends on what you think alignment is. IMO, alignment is nothing more than a statement of which detect spells you trigger. If you have done lots of evil deeds, you show up as a blip on detect evil, therefore we say you have an evil alignment. That doesn't necessarily mean you will do evil deeds in the future; it only records the "marks on your soul" from past deeds.

Because I interpret alignment this way, I think spells with the [Evil] descriptor will eventually turn you Evil. That's what the descriptor means. Even if you cast <evil spell of your choice> for good reasons, you're touching dark energies which leave their supernatural mark on you. Use the spell enough, and the black marks will build up, eventually becoming stronger than any white marks you have. Past that point, even though you're a "good person" (whatever that means), detect evil will look at the color of your aura and consider you evil.

Now, some people see alignment the other way around. Where I argue that bad acts make you "evil", they argue that an Evil alignment is what makes you do bad things. In a world like that, it seems that the only way to change alignment would be by choice (conscious or unconscious). That makes this a much more complicated question, where you get into these questions of relative morality, unintended consequences, the temptations of evil, redemption and repentance, and all kinds of other things that religious philosophers argue about. Me, I got a D- in Philosophy 102, so I'll stick with my simpler interpretation.

 

[dreaded_beast]

I doubt there is such a rule or specification, because there are no mechanics about morality in D&D. It wouldn't be mechanically important. The best you can get is the definition of what Detect Evil (which "detects the presence of evil") sees.

i believe that mechanics for morality in dnd are covered under alignment.

in this case i think morality would be mechanically important, since it would help solve the original poster's question of "is it inherently evil to summon up a demon?"

i believe that it is up to the dm to determine, what are considered good or evil acts in their game.

however, looking at a mainly rule and mechanic view, i do not believe that summoning a demon or casting spells with the "evil" descriptor is an evil act.

so in my opinion, this would not be an "evil" act as covered by the core rules, however the dm may rule otherwise in accordance to the rules of his game and his campaign world.

 

[dreaded_beast]

According to the SRD, every single good deity in existance forbids his servants from casting evil spells.... Casting good spells is likewise a good act forbidden by evil gods.

i don't have the SRD, so could you please quote this?

As regards "summoning a celestial away from whatever important duties they happen to be performing," this is not an issue to me. The celestials want to be summoned. Being summoned and performing acts of good is one of the duties that they perform. It is not an interruption.

i believe that this is campaign specific or up to dm interpretation and can not be said to be true for every celestial that is summoned or for every campaign world.

 

[dreaded_beast]

Because I interpret alignment this way, I think spells with the [Evil] descriptor will eventually turn you Evil. That's what the descriptor means.

so will casting spells with the "good" descriptor turn you good?

 

[KDLadage]

Yes. I would say it is unless your intent is to destroy the creature immediately.

 

[AuraSeer]

About the necromancer who summons celestial hawks:

In my view of alignment, casting any spell with a [Good] descriptor will put a small amount of good karma on the caster's balance. If he casts it enough, it will begin to "white out" some of the evil deeds recorded in his aura. Eventually he will stop showing up on detect evil. I could conceive of a situation where someone used this to disguise his aura, if he's expecting magical investigation.

However, since the necromancer has probably done lots of actual evil acts (murder, theft, oppression, etc.) in his life, it would take lots of good karma to overwrite that. If all he did was summon celestial hawks with all his spell slots, every day, it might take months or years to balance his aura and detect as neutral. Why bother, when a Cloak Of Obscuring Alignment is so cheap?

(Calling powerful celestials would work more quickly, but it'd also bring a lot of risk. If you're an evil nasty dark necromancer guy, a failed planar binding is just as dangerous on a solar as on a pit fiend.)

Someone mentioned the redemption angle, which IMO is a red herring. If the necro wants to start doing good deeds instead of evil deeds, then he just does it. Just as a paladin could decide to burn down a village, a BBEG necro could decide to volunteer at the local soup kitchen. He'll still have an evil alignment, at least until he's done enough good to "white out" the evil from his aura, but what's wrong with that? It's good roleplaying fodder. And used properly in a story, it'll make those PC paladins think twice before slaughtering anyone who detects as evil.

 

[KDLadage]

so will casting spells with the "good" descriptor turn you good?

LOL!

"So... the plan is to cast spells with the [FIRE] descriptor until, finally, I AM fire! I can be the HUMAN TORCH in NO TIME AT ALL!"

 

[AuraSeer]

i don't have the SRD, so could you please quote this?

The SRD is online, at http://www.opengamingfoundation.org

The rule kenjib referred to is in the Cleric description. It states: "Chaotic, Evil, Good, and Lawful Spells: A cleric can't cast spells of an alignment opposed to his own or to his deity's." A good cleric cannot cast [Evil] spells, full stop.

 

[Celebrim]

"so will casting spells with the "good" descriptor turn you good?"

Presumably, yes.

It is presumably just as dangerous to the faith and beliefs of an evil person to be exposed to pure good as it is for a good person to be exposed to pure evil.

And, even if your intent was as KDLage suggests to destroy the creature immediately, that in itself would dangerously shake your faith in evil. It is entirely concievable that an evil person who started conjuring up celestial creatures in order to murder them would (if he was anything but utterly and abhorently evil) after doing or attempting to do so become so striken with guilt and grief at having destroyed so innocent, beautiful, and wonderful of a creature that he would no longer take any pleasure in evil acts.