OOTS 0969 up

[hamishspence]

OOTS 0969 up:

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0969.html

 

[Deuce Traveler]

Not that we didn't know that Belkar was evil, but I wonder how he plans to use that thing if it hurts him when activated...

 

[MarkB]

Not that we didn't know that Belkar was evil, but I wonder how he plans to use that thing if it hurts him when activated...

Maybe he'll back it up with some lead coating.

 

[Dioltach]

Or maybe he'll use it to expose Durkula for beung evil.

 

[MarkB]

Or maybe he'll use it to expose Durkula for beung evil.

That occurred to me, but don't undead in 3.5e automatically detect as evil? Easy enough to explain away.

 

[Scott DeWar]

That is if he can withstand the effects of the amulet has on him. Of course Durkula might argue that if belkor can touch it, then it must not be a protection from evil.

 

[Dioltach]

Or Belkar slips it into the pocket of someone who's about to be bitten by Durkula.
Also, can't free-willed undead be any alignment they choose? I seem to remember an entry for good-aligned elven liches somewhere.

 

[hamishspence]

.
Also, can't free-willed undead be any alignment they choose? I seem to remember an entry for good-aligned elven liches somewhere.

They can. However, by the 3.5 rules, Detect Evil detects "Undead" not "Evil undead".

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/detectEvil.htm

Similarly, it detects "Cleric of evil deity" not "Evil cleric" (LE deities can have LN clerics, CE deities can have CN clerics).

Whatever energy keeps undead running - it's close enough to Evil to give a reading.

 

[tomBitonti]

Is there actually any prohibition against casting protection from evil on an evil character?

The in-comic distress that Belker feels ought not to prevent him from using the amulet. Seems that it would be very useful against Durkon.

Hmm, what would happen if Belker put the amulet on Durkon??

Thx!

TomB

 

[Scott DeWar]

given Belker's response to the amulet, then on Durkula would probably be in utter screaming pain. in theory.