Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Chaosmancer" data-source="post: 9177701" data-attributes="member: 6801228">I am not making up Charm Person. I am not making up Suggestion. I am not making up Dominate PersonI am not making up Command. I am not making up Compelled Duel. I am not making up Dissonant Whispers. I am not making up Tasha's Hideous Laughter.I am not making up Crown of Madness.I am not making up Enthrall.I am not making up Hold Person. I am not making up Tasha's Mind Whip. I am not making up Enemies Abound.I am not making up Fast Friends. I am not making up Incite Greed. I am not making up Compulsion. I am not making up Confusion.I am not making up Geas.I am not making up Psychic Lance. I am not making up Modify Memory. I am not making up Otto's Irresistible Dance. I am not making up Feeblemind. Sure, not all enchantment spells need to be cast by another person on you. But the classic ones that we are imagining here? They are.Fireworks can be used to blind people too. They aren't combat weapons. And what about Creation and Fabrication? Where is the combat potential there? What about Move Earth, which specifically cannot trap or hinder creatures? Mighty Fortress? Temple of the Gods? Druid Grove? There seem to be quite the number of non-combat spells. And yet there is no mention of a "bias" towards those types of spells not existing generally brought up in discussions of the game.Alright. Since Vecna exists I declare that there are now one million more evil spell for enchantment that exist than good ones. And since obviously Vecna exists and would keep evil spells, this must be true, and you can no longer argue that there are more good spells. Until you tell me that because Mystra exists there are actually one million more good spells than evil spells for echantment, using the same logic. But then I point out that Dagon also exists. And then you...Yeah, arguing "my facts not in evidence trump yours" is a waste of everyone's time. It is a red herring, because no matter how many spells you make up, I can make up more. Trying to make any claims at that point is meaningless.I'm doing neither. I'm simply pointing out that "but I can make up more things" isn't a helpful measure.Why can't the Deathless be skeletons and zombies? My Eberron books absolutely give me statblocks using Skeletons and Zombies, along with wights and other undead. I've got a stat-block from Eberron of a Good Aligned Mummy who was not formed through evil, necromantic magic. And that's all 5e material. I'm only "dismissive" because you are trying to have a single sentence in each of the monster lore sections override any possibility of a player taking the utter lack of such a sentence anywhere in the actual rules of their spell, to make something that isn't inherently evil. Also, what happened to alignment being a suggestion? Isn't that right at the beginning of the MM? "The alignment specified in a monster's stat block is the default. Feel free to depart from it and change a monster's alignment to suit the needs of your campaign." So, if I take the MM to be true... then the default is easily departed from and not mandatory.I brought it up because it is easy for someone to have a different idea what is meant by "zombie", meaning you can't default to "but you raised a zombie, and you know what that means!" They looked at the PHB, they relied on the PHB, and the PHB gave them a vague answer. The PHB didn't say that zombies are inherently evil. It didn't say that they attack people when uncommanded. In  fact, it provides a solid basis for arguing the opposite. The fact that "DnD isn't real mythology, it has its own rules" doesn't apply to the fact that, using the rules of DnD, a player could logically end up with a different point of view. One that is equally valid to the "default" of Forgotten Realms and Greyhawk.</blockquote>

Verification