Necromancy Isn't Evil

ecliptic said:
Magic can, by using negative energy. Which it shows by using negative energy to trap a soul to make intelligent undead. Every living and breathing creature has intelligence.

Again, I think you're making a logical leap that isn't necessarily wrong, but isn't actually supported by the rules. I don't see why it must be negative energy that brings stuff to life. In fact, positive energy is a much better fit for animation of life. Heck, the positive energy plane actually animates inanimate objects! Why can't it do the same with flesh?

I also don't see the description of Animate Dead actually talking about trapping souls.

ecliptic said:
So why wouldn't that be evil? You give something life knowing full well it will only last the spell's duration?

Again, it's a theoretical pseudo-soul. It could have structure enough to support body functions, but not a intelligent entity. Life means many things to many people. A headless body sustained by modern medicine is alive by some standards, and it's just a matter of what standard you are going to apply. I personally don't think such heroic measures as creating pseudo-souls to create pseudo-life are required.

I'm not really interested in hijacking this thread any longer to discuss whether the RAW requires everything living to have a soul. I am of the opinion they do not, and the spell that started this all is not necesarily evil. It's just animated flesh to me.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

ecliptic said:
Magic can, by using negative energy. Which it shows by using negative energy to trap a soul to make intelligent undead. Every living and breathing creature has intelligence.

1st edition AD&D explicitly stated that mummies were animated by Positive Energy--yet they were still evil.
 

I don't mind this thread being hijacked when discussing the issue of which spells define as being evil, its a little bit what I am trying to find out. I think when you animate something with Negative Energy, it is evil, but if you simply animate something so that it can sustain its own existence as a living creature (i.e. the fleshpuppet), it might not be evil. The idea I had myself with the spell is that a small heart is used to circulate the blood inside the flesh of the fleshpuppet, keep the flesh alive in a natural manner. No soul is required, because the spell simply uses the natural reactions of the flesh and heart. Actually, electricity or a small amount of positive energy would be sufficient to "jumpstart" the heart so the fleshpuppet becomes a living entity (completely devoid of intelligence, but still), similar to the experiments in Frankenstein where they make arms and hands move with jolts of electricity.

You mentioned that 1st. Edition mummies were animated by positive Energy, but they were still evil. That isn't much different from using positive energy in a Ressurection spell to bring back to life an evil person. The spell is positive, but the re-animated person is still evil. Its not always exactly clear when a spell is itself is evil or if it isn't evil, but simply used for evil purposes.



Dragoolh’s Vampiric Link
Necromancy
Level: Clr 7, Sor/Wiz 7
Components: V, S, M
Casting Time: 1 round
Range: Close (25 ft. + 5 ft./2 levels)
Target: One living creature
Duration: 1 minute/level
Saving Throw: Fortitude negates
Spell Resistance: Yes

Dragoolh’s Vampiric Link creates a connection between the target and the caster. The target is allowed a Fortitude Saving Throw to resist the spell, but if he fails the caster has tapped into his life energy, from which he can pull energy into himself. Each round the caster can transfer up to 5 Hitpoints from the target and into himself. The target is not allowed any additional Saving Throws to resist this drain once it has failed the initial Saving Throw. The caster can choose to transfer less than 5 Hitpoints if he wishes to. These transferred Hitpoints can never cause the caster to succeed his normal maximum amount of Hitpoints. Both living and undead casters can be healed of damage by using Dragoolh’s Vampiric Link, but constructs are not affected (if the caster is a construct, he will still be able to cause the target to loose 5 Hitpoints every round though). If the target ever moves beyond the range of the spell, the spell is instantaneously dispelled. The spell is sometimes used on the creature created by Tyre’s Fleshpuppet or Tyre’s Fleshslave.
Material Component: The tooth of a vampire.
 
Last edited:

Spirit lore sucks as a spell, especially when you consider that a wizard needs a spellbook, almost all spells will be written somewhere and contact other plane and legend lore are both inexpensive or free to cast, or that getting another wizard to let you learn a spell from his book only costs 450gp for a 9th level spell.

3000 seems... silly. Especially with such high chances of failure.

The item creation bit seems a little bit more useful, but to me spells granting feats, especially feats who's sole use is to a spellcaster, are bad things.

The fleshpuppet? Evil evil evil. Sorry, but if producing skeletons (who could have a conceavable purpose that is good) is evil, then creating a blob of living flesh, who's sole purpose is to die at your hands must be evil.
 

Saeviomagy, I might agree that the cost is a little bit high compared to the cost of learning a spell from another wizard, I could nerf it down a tad. But not compared to the two spells mentioned, as neither of them are even close to allowing you to gain information about a spell. They might help identify a spell, nothing more (Contact other Plane only allows yes/no questions to be answered and Legend Lore gives information about an item, location or person).

The purpose of the spell would never be to enable the caster to learn all his spells through. The purpose of it would be to enable him to learn spells that have otherwise been lost from the world, making them unavailable to be learnt from living Wizards. And the fact that you can learn a 9th level spell from a Wizard at 450 still requires you to locate a willing Wizard to teach it to you, which might be easy enough in some Campaign Settings (like Faerun), but alot harder in others. The spell might need to be altered depending on the setting you play in and the availability of magic there. If you play in a really high magic setting where every city has a library of spells that you can purchase for standard prices and no spells have been "lost" to the world, then it is a pointless spell, I agree. In a Dark Sun like setting, it is almost overpowered.

The issue regarding the feat is also something which I am in two minds about. Even though it grants a feat, it isn't as usable as the feat normally is. Since the spell has a limited duration when you gain a virtual creation feat, there is a limit to which items you can create. Since casting the spell takes a week, you can't extend the duration with multiple castings. But a single casting would allow you to manufacture minor items using the creation feat, especially if you use Extend spell on Spirit Lore.

About the Fleshpuppet, I am still not sure if it is evil. Spells become evil if their energy is evil, not because of their purpose. Fireball isn't evil, even though it can only be used for destroying things, Animate Dead is evil despite the fact that you could cast the spell for the sole purpose of getting the created undead to build schools for homeless children. The spell itself and the purpose for using it are two different things. The Fleshpuppet can almost only be used for "evil" things, i.e. using it to drain life from or something similar, but it isn't necessarily evil for that reason. And it is imaginable that someone could use it to create a "decoy", to disturb a divination spell that locates living creatures or something similar.
 

In the tabletop game I am currently playing we are based in Hallowfaust the city of Necromancers. The DM is running it as a very Lawful Neutral society. Mindless Undead aren't evil but Neutral.
 

So what you do when you use the flesh puppet evily is to glare at the player and slowly shift them towards evil. It doesn't need the evil descriptor slaped on it to make certain uses evil.
 

Re: Dragoolh’s Vampiric Link

The text says "The target is not allowed any additional Saving Throws to resist this damage once it has failed the initial Saving Throw." I don't think that this drain should be called damage, because they get DR against it.
 

ecliptic said:
A druid would argue that even animals have souls. So simply having a lower intelligence doesn't stop the spell from being evil.

Your druids might. Mine wouldn't, at least not most of 'em. Your game, though.
 


Remove ads

Top